[GS] Why Sumeria is Still OP

[Nefelia]

Yes, I struggle with other people’s view on this. I did use to view them differently (thought they were OK) but played a game last week.

Great Wall spam in a Petra city in the middle of a vast desert is a beautiful thing... and rather easy to achieve as well if you plan ahead.

 

[tedhebert]

Funny thing with Gilga... I just don't get the war-cart love... Playing again with him, cause I keep wondering what I'm not getting... Everyone was far (10+ mountain tiles), closest was Georgia, of course by the time I got 5-6 war-carts out of the gate and to them ,they had walls built...
So... against walls, war-cart are next to useless, even with battering rams !!!

Every time I try, I end up liking the ziggurats and the barbarian villages = huts, but the war carts end up being non factors.

I guess I should just reroll until I get REAL close neighbors ? Lily insists that carts are useful even from 12 tiles away on deity... well I play normal speel huge immortal, and I'm not getting it...

So... What am I missing ?

EDIT: Man, on top of that, not a single glimpse of iron on all my 7 cities territory... this is going to be a very interesting game ;-)

 

[oPunchDrunko]

Why do people like Sumeria for science victories? I mean the ziggurat gives you 1+ science, but you need flat land to build it... if you have a bunch of hills around you can’t take advantage of that.

 

[Victoria]

of course by the time I got 5-6 war-carts

Go with 2, let the rest catch up.

Why do people like Sumeria for science victories?

+2 science and +1 culture... and when a library is +2 science, yes that is significant. The culture is hard to get also... and 1 builder early +6/+3 that’s impressive. .. grassland rivers.
They also get goodies from tribal villages and I personally practically always levy because these always seems a use at that price.

 

[Kaan Boztepe]

why is sumeria OP? Just in case you are very new to the game/genre and dont like to read a lot. let me summarize it in one word: snowballing aka the art of getting bigger faster as time passes. logarithmic growth curve instead of normal linear growth.
snowballing mechanics are at its best if you can start very very early like immidiately , military units are best suited for this kind of steamroll over opponents and take over vast resources ( doubling your start in normal or trippling in deity ) and continue as if you had more bonuses than the deity AI as a player.

 

[Disgustipated]

Just finished a Sumeria game, really didn't use war carts since my aim was diplomatic victory and I kept the peace all game long. I only built one, and it seemed to help be a deterrent towards the Aztecs attacking me, they attacked someone else instead. Against barbarians it was so-so. It fades away fast in terms of power. Swordsman come out fairly quick, and they struggle against them. Your best bet is to get them out fast before archers and swordsmen come out.

Played a huge lakes map which is huge since there is so much land. Had a lot of flood plains and flat lands for ziggaruts, but floods kept washing them away. Still a very strong UI, gives you that early game boost to keep you afloat.

Certainly a very strong civ, even if you play them peacefully. Got the diplo victory some time in the 1800's (I'd have to look it up since I wasn't really paying attention).

 

[Lord Lakely]

The real secret to the War Cart's power is their speed. Capturing cities before they flip back is HUGE. With Monty and Aminatore I often find that I lose my captured cities through loyalty pressure. With Gilgamesh the war concludes so quickly that I don't even have worry about that.

The trick is to turn this into a long-term advantage. On a small map it's game over. On large or above though? Still a lot of game left...

 

[Lily_Lancer]

The real secret to the War Cart's power is their speed. Capturing cities before they flip back is HUGE. With Monty and Aminatore I often find that I lose my captured cities through loyalty pressure. With Gilgamesh the war concludes so quickly that I don't even have worry about that.

The trick is to turn this into a long-term advantage. On a small map it's game over. On large or above though? Still a lot of game left...

If you don't have governors then they flip back quickly.
If you do have governors then there's no problem. With a governor your newly captured city can stand at least 10 turns, giving you enough time to conquer the next one.

 

[lotrmith]

They not only works on Deity but also works on online speed Deity.
They not only works on online Deity but also works on online Deity even if your neighbor is not close from yours (12 tiles away).
They not only works on online Deity and far away neighbors, but also works on online Deity and far away neighbors without flat land ( in fact as you can see more than half of the Russian lands are hills).

They not only works on online Deity and far away neighbors without flat land, but also works on online Deity and far away neighbors without flat land with significant speed. (<T30)

They only don't work for Chandragputa and Gandhi, you need Maryannu Chariot Archers.

Let's be real, you attacked Russia, one of if not the easiest Civs to rush because the AI will invest heavily in Lavra infrastructure... here in a poor (for Russia) non-Tundra start. You'd know this if you'd ever played Russia.

 

[Lily_Lancer]

Let's be real, you attacked Russia, one of if not the easiest Civs to rush because the AI will invest heavily in Lavra infrastructure... here in a poor (for Russia) non-Tundra start. You'd know this if you'd ever played Russia.

Most Civs have no differences in such an early game.

I can imagine what you may be saying

If I attack England you'll say "Let's be real, you attacked England, one of if not the easiest Civs to rush because the AI will invest heavily in RNDY infrastructure... here in a poor (for England) non-island start. You'd know this if you'd ever played England"

If I attack Brazil you'll say "Let's be real, you attacked Brazil, one of if not the easiest Civs to rush because the AI will invest heavily in Carnival infrastructure... here in a poor (for Brazil) non-rainforest start. You'd know this if you'd ever played Brazil"

If I attack Germany you'll say "Let's be real, you attacked Germany, one of if not the easiest Civs to rush because the AI will take all his troops to attack CS... here in a poor (for Germany) non-nearby CS start. You'd know this if you'd ever played Germany"

If I attack Phoenicia you'll say "Let's be real, you attacked Phoenicia, one of if not the easiest Civs to rush because the AI will invest heavily in Cothon infrastructure ... here in a poor (for Phoenocia) whatever start. You'd know this if you'd ever played Phoenicia"

If I attack China you'll say "Let's be real, you attacked China, one of if not the easiest Civs to rush because the AI will invest heavily in wonders ... here in a poor (for China) non-wonder start. You'd know this if you'd ever played China"

If I attack Korea you'll say "Let's be real, you attacked Korea, one of if not the easiest Civs to rush because the AI will invest heavily in Seowon infrastructure ... here in a poor (for Korea) start. You'd know this if you'd ever played Korea"

If I attack Japan you'll say "Let's be real, you attacked Japan, one of if not the easiest Civs to rush because the AI will invest heavily in Meiji districts infrastructure ... here in a poor (for Japan) whatever start. You'd know this if you'd ever played Japan"

If I attack Greece you'll say "Let's be real, you attacked Greece, one of if not the easiest Civs to rush because the AI will invest heavily in Acropolis infrastructure ... here in a poor (for Greece) whatever start. You'd know this if you'd ever played Greece"

Whatever Civ I'm attacking, it suddenly becomes "one of if not the easiest Civs to rush".

I'm really looking forward to you playing online Deity with 7 Russias to see if they're really the easiest to rush.

 

[lotrmith]

Most Civs have no differences in such an early game.

I can imagine what you may be saying

If I attack England you'll say "Let's be real, you attacked England, one of if not the easiest Civs to rush because the AI will invest heavily in RNDY infrastructure... here in a poor (for England) non-island start. You'd know this if you'd ever played England"

If I attack Brazil you'll say "Let's be real, you attacked Brazil, one of if not the easiest Civs to rush because the AI will invest heavily in Carnival infrastructure... here in a poor (for Brazil) non-rainforest start. You'd know this if you'd ever played Brazil"

If I attack Germany you'll say "Let's be real, you attacked Germany, one of if not the easiest Civs to rush because the AI will take all his troops to attack CS... here in a poor (for Germany) non-nearby CS start. You'd know this if you'd ever played Germany"

If I attack Phoenicia you'll say "Let's be real, you attacked Phoenicia, one of if not the easiest Civs to rush because the AI will invest heavily in Cothon infrastructure ... here in a poor (for Phoenocia) whatever start. You'd know this if you'd ever played Phoenicia"

If I attack China you'll say "Let's be real, you attacked China, one of if not the easiest Civs to rush because the AI will invest heavily in wonders ... here in a poor (for China) non-wonder start. You'd know this if you'd ever played China"

If I attack Korea you'll say "Let's be real, you attacked Korea, one of if not the easiest Civs to rush because the AI will invest heavily in Seowon infrastructure ... here in a poor (for Korea) start. You'd know this if you'd ever played Korea"

If I attack Japan you'll say "Let's be real, you attacked Japan, one of if not the easiest Civs to rush because the AI will invest heavily in Meiji districts infrastructure ... here in a poor (for Japan) whatever start. You'd know this if you'd ever played Japan"

If I attack Greece you'll say "Let's be real, you attacked Greece, one of if not the easiest Civs to rush because the AI will invest heavily in Acropolis infrastructure ... here in a poor (for Greece) whatever start. You'd know this if you'd ever played Greece"

Whatever Civ I'm attacking, it suddenly becomes "one of if not the easiest Civs to rush".

I'm really looking forward to you playing online Deity with 7 Russias to see if they're really the easiest to rush.

I can see you've practiced saying these things yourself, a lot.

P.S. 100% Russia is one of the easiest civs to rush especially when they get a non-tundra start.

 

[Lily_Lancer]

I can see you've practiced saying these things yourself, a lot.

P.S. 100% Russia is one of the easiest civs to rush especially when they get a non-tundra start.

I'm really looking forward to you rushing 7 Russias in ancient era (online Deity). Since they are the "100% easiest to rush", using a Civ other than Sumeria.


Look, it is 100% certain that you goal is not to discuss things, but to turn down and bully others/ You may be considering yourself a better player. However I don't know your level and by your words I guess you don't even play the game as good as me. Where does your courage come from?

 

[kb27787]

Most Civs have no differences in such an early game.

I can imagine what you may be saying

If I attack England you'll say "Let's be real, you attacked England, one of if not the easiest Civs to rush because the AI will invest heavily in RNDY infrastructure... here in a poor (for England) non-island start. You'd know this if you'd ever played England"

If I attack Brazil you'll say "Let's be real, you attacked Brazil, one of if not the easiest Civs to rush because the AI will invest heavily in Carnival infrastructure... here in a poor (for Brazil) non-rainforest start. You'd know this if you'd ever played Brazil"

If I attack Germany you'll say "Let's be real, you attacked Germany, one of if not the easiest Civs to rush because the AI will take all his troops to attack CS... here in a poor (for Germany) non-nearby CS start. You'd know this if you'd ever played Germany"

If I attack Phoenicia you'll say "Let's be real, you attacked Phoenicia, one of if not the easiest Civs to rush because the AI will invest heavily in Cothon infrastructure ... here in a poor (for Phoenocia) whatever start. You'd know this if you'd ever played Phoenicia"

If I attack China you'll say "Let's be real, you attacked China, one of if not the easiest Civs to rush because the AI will invest heavily in wonders ... here in a poor (for China) non-wonder start. You'd know this if you'd ever played China"

If I attack Korea you'll say "Let's be real, you attacked Korea, one of if not the easiest Civs to rush because the AI will invest heavily in Seowon infrastructure ... here in a poor (for Korea) start. You'd know this if you'd ever played Korea"

If I attack Japan you'll say "Let's be real, you attacked Japan, one of if not the easiest Civs to rush because the AI will invest heavily in Meiji districts infrastructure ... here in a poor (for Japan) whatever start. You'd know this if you'd ever played Japan"

If I attack Greece you'll say "Let's be real, you attacked Greece, one of if not the easiest Civs to rush because the AI will invest heavily in Acropolis infrastructure ... here in a poor (for Greece) whatever start. You'd know this if you'd ever played Greece"

Whatever Civ I'm attacking, it suddenly becomes "one of if not the easiest Civs to rush".

I'm really looking forward to you playing online Deity with 7 Russias to see if they're really the easiest to rush.

We-ll I might agree somewhat... However, aside from the infrastructure I always think the biggest difference is spawn bias.

Russia is easy for warcart rush because of mainly open tundra terrain (not many woods and hills). 12 tiles of flatland and 12 tiles of wooded hills and rivers and rainforest are very different.

I wouldn't be so confident in the warcart if you face Inca hills and mountains or Kongo rainforest hills where these essentially become the same movement as eagle warriors, but without the capture and oligarchy bonuses. In my experience even Macedonian hetairoi (which is ridiculous strong with GG, 5 movement) struggle against those kind of civs.

 

[Lily_Lancer]

We-ll I might agree somewhat... However, aside from the infrastructure I always think the biggest difference is spawn bias.

Russia is easy for warcart rush because of mainly open tundra terrain (not many woods and hills). 12 tiles of flatland and 12 tiles of wooded hills and rivers and rainforest are very different.

I wouldn't be so confident in the warcart if you face Inca hills and mountains or Kongo rainforest hills where these essentially become the same movement as eagle warriors, but without the capture and oligarchy bonuses. In my experience even Macedonian hetairoi (which is ridiculous strong with GG, 5 movement) struggle against those kind of civs.

This Russia is full of hills, not open terrains, if you look at the map carefully enough.
Hills give War Carts extra defense, does not cost much problem actually.
Your problem shall be being too slow that Ai have time to strengthen their military. If you use hetairoi to deal with ancient Civ then you'll win easily

 

[bitula]

I think Russia AI is bugged with those Lavras. In 8 of my Deity games in a row Peter was the only one who virtually had no army to defend himself. Conquering his cities was like playing on Settler difficulty...

 

[vladisimo]

I think Russia AI is bugged with those Lavras. In 8 of my Deity games in a row Peter was the only one who virtually had no army to defend himself. Conquering his cities was like playing on Settler difficulty...

I never got why people are so obsessed over conquering stuff in this game. I never do it unless necesary to go to war or when/if I get my uniques online in time for them to do damage.

 

[tetley]

I never got why people are so obsessed over conquering stuff in this game.

I just do whatever wins. Let the game architects decide stuff between role-playing, peaceful victories, and such. I just play it. Actually I am a real first-class a-hole in the game, breaking pledges, backstabbing, bullying weak people, and such. Who cares. Eleanor of Aquitaine may be nice, beautiful and all, but she is nothing but a bunch of computer bits.

If I played online (which I don't), I would be different towards the human players.

The real secret to the War Cart's power is their speed.

What I liked about war carts (like I said before) was not so much in taking out my neighbor, but in barb-hunting. I did not anticipate that going into the game. Sure, I built up a force big enough to take out my neighbor, as usual. But before it was built up enough, I sent out war carts and scouts on barb expeditions. That was far more lucrative than usual, because of barb camps=tribal villages. The war carts and scouts are nice and fast; they can go out a long ways and come back.

 

[tetley]

His teeth, man, Gilgamesh's teeth! Who is this guy's dentist?

 

[Alexadamz]

His teeth, man, Gilgamesh's teeth! Who is this guy's dentist?


View attachment 536885

Enkidu? It is a hell of an adventure going to the dentist for some people!

 

[Sostratus]

I never got why people are so obsessed over conquering stuff in this game. I never do it unless necesary to go to war or when/if I get my uniques online in time for them to do damage.

Because a fixed production investment into a settler will get you a city that is a new, independent production stream. Putting that same production into military units will let you capture someone else’s city, granting you a new independent production stream, plus every piece of infrastructure that city has ever built. You are literally able to steal your opponent’s turns from the past for yourself.
Add in the fact that the investment into settlers gives you a fixed number of cities but the army can keep capturing forever, mixed in with the fact that you can conquer and build settlers in parallel, and it’s no wonder why people choose war.

It reminds me of a remark I read here about CivBE shorty after release when you could straight up ignore the in game global happiness... “but at that negative level, you cannot build new cities!”
“But youre building cities, and I’m taking them!”