Warrior as "Scout"?

Bostock

King
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
784
Anyone here ever go scout-warrior or scout-infra-warrior, with the warrior being used in a scouting role? (Or scout-infra-archer, and the same?) Though more expensive and slower, they tend not to waste as much time healing as a non-survivalism scout. (And a survivalism scout is usually one that has already wasted a lot of time healing.) But... they're more expensive and slow. Opinions?
 
No. You can often avoid barbs, and you don't need the scout at full health to find stuff.
The initial warrior is used to scout, sure, but usually makes a circle to come back around t30 to fend off the emerging barbs.
 
My trouble with scouting with a damaged scout is that often it then runs into situations that finish it off, where it would have survived had it been undamaged.
 
well, if you only travel one time at a time, u rarely get hit, so its not a big issue. If it dies - well, thats it. Just make another one. Its way way better than the warrior for scouting.
 
The ground that second scout will cover will more than pay for itself, and i don't mean immediately in :commerce:. If you expend the extra hammers in a warrior or archer, it is far better to keep it around for offense, defense, or barb quests (or all of the above!).
 
If you don't automate him and walk only one step check and then take the second step, it's really hard to lose a scout.

Even if you get hit you can retreat by taking any route through rough terrain and the barb cannot keep up with you (unless horseman which is only later).
 
I would use warriors for scouting if I had a warrior UU or even a sword UU to upgrade into. Other than that, scouts are just generally better.
 
Only with the Aztecs. And even that's not true, because with the Aztecs I just go Jaguar, Jaguar and don't build Scouts at all.
 
Trip Scout dominates Scout -> Warrior any day of the week.

The only use for Warriors in fog-busting is the initial Warrior, and even he eventually has to return home to cover the Workers.

The days of Warrior rush are long gone, and if you're spamming Jaguars there's a different purpose behind that choice.
 
Unless your playing on a map with only plains, or very small islands, the warrior is no substitute for a scout.

They can travel much quicker through most tarrien and have better sight. Normally, in the first 20/40 turns, combat really isn't a issue for the scout. If you get cornered by a single warrior unit, just either use your superior mobility to lose him or alternatively turtle up and you will outlast him. If you get caught by more then one barb unit, it's tough luck. That should nearly never happen anyways.

The warrior is pretty effective at looking around the immediate area for the first 20/30 turns though, while it's slower, it can have a good look around before turning to guard any workers.
 
Still doesn't change the fact that warriors and jaguars are 40 hammers and scouts are 25, and earlier scouts is better. Plus, like half the time I have 0 iron to even upgrade early barb fighting warriors, anyway.
 
Jaggers you take because killing to heal later on is decently useful. I just don't see warriors as useful in any shape or form as a combat or scouting unit. If I need combat, I just get archers. It might be a tech tree away, but I will often need it to get roads anyways. If my scout upgrades into an archer, then thats fantastic as I will have ranged support wherever I need it.
 
I always play with ancient ruins turned off, and as such I never build a scout. Getting not-enough-gold-to-buy-anything instead of half that amount from meeting a CS first isn't reason enough to build scouts for me. I usually meet all the nearby CSs and civs from defensively probing out my early warriors and after horseback riding I build a horseman to discover the rest of the continent; after astronomy one caravel to discover the rest of the world.
But if I played with ruins, I'd probably build a scout or two.
 
I always play with ancient ruins turned off, and as such I never build a scout. Getting not-enough-gold-to-buy-anything instead of half that amount from meeting a CS first isn't reason enough to build scouts for me. I usually meet all the nearby CSs and civs from defensively probing out my early warriors and after horseback riding I build a horseman to discover the rest of the continent; after astronomy one caravel to discover the rest of the world.
But if I played with ruins, I'd probably build a scout or two.

I'm with you... I only seriously uncover the map using my first horse. My scout is there to pick up ruins not to far away, but after some handful dozen turns the ruins (except the ones on islands) are all taken anyway.
 
I always play with ancient ruins turned off, and as such I never build a scout. Getting not-enough-gold-to-buy-anything instead of half that amount from meeting a CS first isn't reason enough to build scouts for me. I usually meet all the nearby CSs and civs from defensively probing out my early warriors and after horseback riding I build a horseman to discover the rest of the continent; after astronomy one caravel to discover the rest of the world.
But if I played with ruins, I'd probably build a scout or two.

Same thing for me. Never play with ruins, and I only build a Scout in like ~20% of my games, only when my starting point is already full of rough terrain, and always after the Monument. Bronze Working and Horseback Riding are both low priority for me, sometimes I get them after Philosophy, and I get Archery after Animal Husbandry (extra hammer from potential horses) and the luxury techs, so I build at least 2 warriors for barb quests, and they will be my melee force if I am doing a CB rush, warriors can survive against archers and a >20 strength city with some pillaging healing.
 
Someone above mentioned moving 1 tile at a time with your Scout. Can't emphasize this enough. You can (mostly) avoid barbs if you scout carefully.

Also, always try to end your movement on a hill, just so you can see further over other adjacent hills and plan your next move.
 
Top Bottom