Who remembers Civ IV warrior rush? Poor AI + 0 war mongering in ancient

[redeemed371240]

I vaguely remember this strategy being called "cheap" in Civ IV, especially on lower difficulties, but given how ridiculously easy it seems to capture cities and no warmongering in the ancient era, what's stopping us from clearing a continent all for ourselves?

I think this could be a viable strategy for all victory types since playing wide is powerful in Civ VI. Maintenance costs are much cheaper than in Civ V and in general, the more tiles and districts, the stronger your empire. It may even allow for earlier finish dates in some scenarios.

What do you think?

 

[Marvinlegend]

nothing stops you, early rushes are as far as I can tell viewed as most efficient strategy right now, warriors plus archers can take out several cities, even on deity.

 

[skyclad]

Yes its just so lame. If you spam warriors take a capital super early its like playing two levels below... Why not just play on king.?

 

[CaiusDrewart]

More cities are a good thing (that's good game design) and the AI can't defend itself (that's bad game design), so yeah, take all their stuff.

 

[IronfighterXXX]

Yes its just so lame. If you spam warriors take a capital super early its like playing two levels below... Why not just play on king.?

Well, lame is to create game which allows such 'cheap' tactics. On highest difficulty levels I want to do everything what is possible to win.

 

[nate46]

As a civ IV player -- if warrior rushing is a viable strategy for you, you need to up the difficulty level, haha. Quecha Rush (inca unique unit), on the other hand, works on any difficulty -- this may be the ultimate cheese strat you're thinking of..

Anyway, Civ VI is fun but not at all balanced yet. I don't think you should think too hard about stuff like this. Right now its one of those games where you just have to agree not to abuse overpowered things if you want to enjoy it properly.