what is better???

Tommy1234567890

Warlord
Joined
Jul 17, 2005
Messages
298
Location
Argentina
is it better to have UU's early on or later on???
 
i think there should be one for every age
 
Tommy1234567890 said:
is it better to have UU's early on or later on???

In C3 a good early UU was much more useful, that's why I played the Persians so much. In C4 it may be different, since early expansion is not as feasable as it was before.
 
UUs in Civ III allowed players to more easily trigger a golden age. That was their primary importance to me, anyway. Generally speaking, an early game golden age was superior to a later golden age... but it varied from game to game.
 
i guess it is beter to have it later in civ 4 so you have time to expand further

may be america could have native american archer for ancient native americans with primitive rifles for medieval for industrial american GI and modern the navy seals
 
Hahahaha! Minutemen were definitely not medieval, but colonial (~1700s). And in that period it'd be better to have a UU called Continental Rifleman (yes, I know, that's after the independence, but from a realistic point of view, Americans shouldn't even be there as a civ).
 
My experience in C3 was that early UU's were more effective. In the early game, there are fewer troops, and they're of lower quality, so small increases in power are more meaningful. Later on, when there are hordes of units trampling everything, and they're more powerful, gaining a small increase in attack doesn't mean as much.

Truthfully, though, I've found that the UUs which had mobility bonuses were much better than those with combat stat bonuses.
 
Back
Top Bottom