The Romans

[scoutsout]

sorry Ision...

 

[Ision]

ENOUGH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This thread is about the Romans, their traits, strengths, weaknesses, UU, history, Rome specific strats, a place to praise or trash my review....take your pick.......BUT, it is NOT a forum for this type of discussion. To whatever degree I myself contributed to this, I stand guilty as well perhaps. But for Gods sake!

So now I have a small request - get the hell out of my thread with all this stuff - please-

pretty please with sugar on top...................

Sincerely,

Ision

 

[denyd]

To get this back on track (and maybe I missed this during the recent discussions), but you mention researching straight for Philosophy and taking Code of Laws as your free tech. Any thoughts on research CoL before Philosophy and taking Republic (the much more expensive tech) as the freebie? You do run the risk of being beaten to Philosophy, but in my expierence, the AI seems to prefer Map Making, which makes this a potentially more profitable path.

I do completly agree with your analysis of the mismatch of traits making this tribe a difficult one to win with. Please keep those excellent reviews coming.

 

[Ision]

rofl.............

please excuse my laughing - but after the last dozen post I can't help but laugh after reading your post.

The answer to your question is: depends what level you're playing on. The lower the level the more likely you are to get away with it. IMO, at Monarch it would be very very dangerous to try - at Emp it will almost assuredly fail.

Ision

 

[denyd]

Thanks for the smile...

Instead of CoL wouldn't selecting Map Making, Mathematics or Polytheism as the bonus tech provide more trade rewards. Then you could research CoL (the cheaper tech) on your own, since the AI don't normally put much value in the tech?

 

[Ision]

Depends on what your goal is: if a beeline to Republic is the goal - the answewr is obviously NO. if you are going to be a hardcore warmonger then Poly is the route - if your on water - Map Making. Whatever your decision, it should NOT NOT NOT be made on the basis of the free techs 'trade' value. It should be made on the basis of that free techs value to your greater strategic goals. In fact I have even used it once for Currency - wanting to have a good number of marketplaces up before going Republic later -

Ision

 

[denyd]

Without getting too far off topic

My choice is sometimes predicated on what the AI have. If there's code of laws, polytheism, literature and currency known by various AI, I would probably select map making and use to regain tech parity, even on a panagea.

To move back on topic, any thoughts on the next tribe to be reviewed?

 

[Ision]

If there's code of laws, polytheism, literature and currency known by various AI, I would probably select map making and use to regain tech parity, even on a panagea.

Naturally that is the exception. In that context I too would often choose the yet unknown tech. My response was based under the assumption that the free tech was going to be un-known in the first place.

I will be reviewing the Aztecs next.........

Ision

 

[Zardnaar]

Ision one thing I've always wondered about. Were you perhaps to harsh on Rome in your review? To me its slightly better than a 3rd tier civ because

1. Its UU- it great.

2. Commercial trait. IMHO a top 3 trait behind agricultural and industrial

3. Starts with Alphabet. head start towards philosophy, GL,Code of Laws, Republic.

4. Can time you GA and quickly produce temples/librarys/marketplaces- alot of infrastructure if you want to Republic for example.


I often consider a civs strength by a combination of 2 traits and UU- Rome gets 2 out of 3. The militaristic trait is OK but doesn't combo that well with commercial. However I can think of a few civs with worse trait combos and worse UU than Rome.

 

[Ision]

1. Its UU- it great.

2. Commercial trait. IMHO a top 3 trait behind agricultural and industrial

3. Starts with Alphabet. head start towards philosophy, GL,Code of Laws, Republic.

4. Can time you GA and quickly produce temples/librarys/marketplaces- alot of infrastructure if you want to Republic for example.

1. Its UU is very good - not great. Bear in mind that my reviews intentionally highlight and dwell upon the better aspects of the civs. Much of my singing the praises of this unit was from a lack of other praises to sing about.

2. Whether or not the trait standing alone is 3rd best or not is inconsequential - even if I were to grant you this as a fact; to judge the CIV as a whole, the trait must be judged IN concert to how it interacts with its sister trait.

3. Starting with Alphabet as a head start to Philosophy and a free tech is an advantage depending on your goals and what level you are playing on. In and of itself it is not an automatic advantage. Furthermore it assumes that you will win that race to Philosophy, and assumes that you will you are willing to pass up on the beeline to Iron Working in order to have access to those solid Legion UUs before other Civs have a more solid military. Since I will assume that the player is not playing at a level he completely dominates, and thus knows with certainty that the beeline to Phi - beeline to Republic will never fail, and that he can somewhat ignore a greater military build-up: the advantage you cite is not nearly as clear cut as it appears. The civs that really DO have the jump of Philosophy are the ones that have the Agri or Exp with Sea or Com combo. Rome is not among them.

4. Timing GAs can be done with any CIV, albeit to varying degrees. The Romans do not have any especially special advantage in being able to 'time' their GA - unless you are comparing them only to 5 or 6 of the 31 civs.

Ision

 

[Zardnaar]

Ision still there a few other civs with awkward trait combos and worse UU. Would you agree then Rome would be one of the better 3rd tier civs?

 

[RichardMNixon]

Anyone else think Rome should be Industrial/Militaristic?

I agree, their best known traits were legions and roads: military and workers. I love Rome historically and love the legionairy, so I played it for a long time, probably up until I came to this site. I read these, tried some new civs, and I'll agree with Ision, Rome just can't compete...

 

[Mirc]

Ision surely doesn't like playing with Rome. Then why did he write this article?

 

[Richard Cribb]

Ision surely doesn't like playing with Rome. Then why did he write this article?

Because he originally intended to review all the civs.

Anyone else think Rome should be Industrial/Militaristic?

I sure do, the Romans were a most industrial people. However I think they just needed one civ with the combo Militaristic/Commercial and couldn't imagine any other more fitting , just like they needed one Industrial/Seafaring and thus deprived Carthage of the commercial trait, which would have been more in accordance with history.

 

[Holy Despot]

Because he originally intended to review all the civs.

I sure do, the Romans were a most industrial people.

Actually the Romans were more commercial than industrious because they had the largest network of roads in the ancient world and the best commerce(they had to,they needed a lot of money to manage their empire). So umm...I think the Chinese are a lot more suited with this trait.

 

[Richard Cribb]

Actually the Romans were more commercial than industrious because they had the largest network of roads in the ancient world and the best commerce(they had to,they needed a lot of money to manage their empire). So umm...I think the Chinese are a lot more suited with this trait.

I do not in any way disagree that it is reasonable to apply the commercial trait to the Romans, and that the whole process with applying traits is quite difficult.
However, I still think that the Romans should be industrious. Just look at what you wrote yourself; they had the largest road network in the ancient world. Very industrious, I would say. Keep also in mind their great achievements in engineering, both regarding public works and military, and how important a tool the spade was for a legionary.
Regarding China, a strong case could be made for them being commercial for that matter, just consider their amazingly advanced bureacracy which ensured a good control with corruption and effective taxing.That said, I am comfortable with them being industrious anyway.

 

[Mirc]

I do not in any way disagree that it is reasonable to apply the commercial trait to the Romans, and that the whole process with applying traits is quite difficult.
However, I still think that the Romans should be industrious. Just look at what you wrote yourself; they had the largest road network in the ancient world. Very industrious, I would say. Keep also in mind their great achievements in engineering, both regarding public works and military, and how important a tool the spade was for a legionary.
Regarding China, a strong case could be made for them being commercial for that matter, just consider their amazingly advanced bureacracy which ensured a good control with corruption and effective taxing.That said, I am comfortable with them being industrious anyway.

That's exactly what I was about to say. I'm working on a scenario with improved rules and here every civ gets an extra trait. Rome got Industrious.

BTW, the last 5 posts in this thread are only from Romanians or people who lived in Romania!

 

[Holy Despot]

luceafarul you know a lot of history, very good...Anyway historically The Romans are my favourite civ but in the game this would be The Chinese which are perfect for Conquest victories or The Egyptians which are perfect for Cultural victories mmm... or The Japanese Which are also good at Conquest victories aaaa or... As you can see a good civ player knows how to use all civs and knows everybody's weaknesses and strenghts.So stop making The Romans industrious and The Chinese commercial and ''Go play the game''! Have fun!

Oh and did you know that your Avatar represents Mihai Eminescu our national poet (perhaps you live in Romania )

 

[Richard Cribb]

luceafarul you know a lot of history, very good...

Thanks. I happen to be a historian, even if I am not an expert on the Ancient era.

Anyway historically The Romans are my favourite civ but in the game this would be The Chinese which are perfect for Conquest victories or The Egyptians which are perfect for Cultural victories mmm... or The Japanese Which are also good at Conquest victories aaaa or...

Being a peaceful kind of player, France, Greece ,England or Sumeria suits me well, while my only win on Demi-God (out of three attempts) was with the Hittites! I fully agree with you that China is great for war-monging, while Egypt was great in Vanilla and PTW.

As you can see a good civ player knows how to use all civs and knows everybody's weaknesses and strenghts.So stop making The Romans industrious and The Chinese commercial and ''Go play the game''! Have fun!

True. Personally I am not so good, I play it for fun and I am content with mastering it on Emperor level. But yes, having fun is the most important.

Oh and did you know that your Avatar represents Mihai Eminescu our national poet (perhaps you live in Romania )

Yes, I know Eminescu's great works very well. In the 90's I was married to a girl from Bucuresti and visited your nice country many times; I lived in Bucuresti for about half a year in '98. Back then I could speak your language quite well, I am still able to read it, but writing correctly is difficult for me I am afraid.