Why the english AREN'T the best for domination!

[I-am-a-panda]

People say horseback riding + monarchy = feudalism = knights. Fair 'nuff. But when your'e at 2200 bc. or whatever wit h a few warriors and 2-3 cities, feudalsim takes 47 turns!! Yes 47 turns! your better off studying writing and aiming for catapult units!

 

[Minotaur24]

That's true...you almost have to bank on a great scientist. However, if you crank out three cities in the start (capital, 100 gold bonus settler, and one production settler), you can start one city on the Samurai Castle, and by the time you get Feudalism you will either have +1 attack, or the ability to quickly crank out knight army's with your built up production. The latter is actually how I owned the map on King level.

 

[NaZdReG]

they're not bad.. but hardly overpowering.

knights can still lose to fortified archer army behind a wall. and realistically by the time you get it researched they're likely to have unlocked atleast catapults. if they skirmish defence and attack your knights before they can assault the town you've lost most of your advantage.

once they get to pikemen (or if they're the greeks) you've lost your entire advantage

NaZ

 

[Aden52]

47 turns, depending on your science. And you don't need a great scientist to pull this off. The first game I played on emperor I didn't use a great scientist, I just went horseback riding - > writing - > feudalism. It would be smart to pick up writing before trying to slingshot for feudalism. Building libraries and setting your cities to science should be enough. When I did this on Emperor I rushed Egypt with knights, and Egypt was way ahead in tech. What did they have for defense? Archers still...

And the point of being able to bee-line for knights is notone of the bigger reasons why England is great for domination. While it does mean that you have more potential for early dominance, it does not mean that you will be victorious no matter what. Naval attack +1, and Double Naval Support are huge bonuses in the end. It means no matter what, your navy is slightly stronger (anything to help increase the odds, even if it is just +1, it's better than nothing). Also, the double naval support is ridiculous. The other day I was playing and my fighters had 100 strength. Tanks had 170 strength. What can defend against that?

I think England is great for domination, maybe not the best, but they sure can be great. If you happen across a great scientist early on... then you can pretty much call the game right there...

You could always go for catapults, but they have less defense and movement. No point in being the English, if your going to race for catapults though, might as well be the Arabs.

Oh and another thing to cut down the tech time... build a city near dye! Thats lots of extra science right there, especially when you build a library.

 

[vinstafresh]

Build your second city with 2 dyes in the city radius and rush a library. Your lead will be enormous!

But that same strategy goes for India as well.

 

[Cromat]

I won using the English early Knights strategy twice, once on King and once on Emperor, and both times I did not have a Great Scientist. Building Libaries and focusing on science was enough to make Feudalism a 16-18 turn research, which isn't too bad since it practically wins you the game.

 

[NaZdReG]

3 knights is 12 attack yes?

a fortified archer army behind a wall and its an even fight

now that's assuming they're playing that defensively. and it's unlikely that all of their cities will be that defended

but catapults beat knights. so a skirmish defence would hurt this strat alot as well.

and if they get to democracy your advantage is negated completely

I guess it all depends on how fast you can get there and how quick you can leverage it. with a great scientist I can see it being truly brutal.

 

[Aden52]

3 knights is 12 attack without veteran. Veteran makes 18 (no reason why they should not be veteran). Infiltration adds another 50% to make 24, and attacking from a hill makes 30. If you get a great general in there too, then it adds up even more.

I've used knights in war against riflemen many times, and have been successful, so when I hear people talk about how they are even with archers, or its hard to even use them against archers... I laugh.

I don't really see how catapults beat knights, knights have more defense and movement... with the same attack.

Also, democracy does not negate knights completely. By the time they get democracy your knights should already have promotions to still give you the advantage. By the time they get riflemen you could still attack with knights, provided they are heavily promoted and you can attack from a hill. Great generals always help.

Oh, and also factor in that you can use spies to decrease fortifications, which will help give you more of an edge against archers/pikemen/riflemen.

If you can get knights fast enough, it will pretty much win you the game. All you have to do is conquer 1 or 2 other civs and the rest of the game you can outproduce the AI. Also, the double navy support makes you really dominant in the end game.

Again, England may not be the best, but they are up there

 

[rabidveggie]

That's assuming your playing against a computer which lacks common sense, also their archers are more likely to have higher promotions since they've been around longer. I like Catapults more because they don't move when they attack, I think they are cheaper to build, but I can't remember, and roads pretty much negate the movement bonus. Why even have two movement when you have no defense units that can keep up? One catapult has equal odds with an army of knights if it attacks. I pretty much avoid knights now in the game since to me, their are just better cost effective units.

 

[Aden52]

The AI's archers are less likely to have promotions (how often do you see AI fight each other, doesn't happen too often) unless they are Russia. Archers are not around that much longer than knights, really (seeing as how you bee line for knights).

I also like how catapults don't move when they attack, however, I still prefer knights for the extra movement. Sure, roads will help your catapults move far, but a knight will still go farther through your road network, which means he gets into the action faster. The extra movement also helps you position your knights into defensive areas like forests/behind rivers, and in offensive areas like hills, while still having a movement point on that same turn. Which means more action.

No reason to bring defensive units up to protect your knights, if you rush for knights, they will have just as much defense as archers (which is enough defense to handle legions and horsemen).

There might be more cost effective units, but again, you're rushing for the knights, and early on they are really fearsome. It also depends on your play style, for what you consider to be cost effective, others may not, just because of the different strategies.

 

[MKElderGod]

People say horseback riding + monarchy = feudalism = knights. Fair 'nuff. But when your'e at 2200 bc. or whatever wit h a few warriors and 2-3 cities, feudalsim takes 47 turns!! Yes 47 turns! your better off studying writing and aiming for catapult units!

Not true at all, having one city with coast, dye , library and scientist if you get it. Can get you knights from 6-13 turns. Im actually going to make a thread about them being arguably one of the best if not best civ.

 

[ATL Jones Bro3]

double post... sorry.

 

[ATL Jones Bro3]

3 knights is 12 attack yes?

a fortified archer army behind a wall and its an even fight

now that's assuming they're playing that defensively. and it's unlikely that all of their cities will be that defended

but catapults beat knights. so a skirmish defence would hurt this strat alot as well.

and if they get to democracy your advantage is negated completely

I guess it all depends on how fast you can get there and how quick you can leverage it. with a great scientist I can see it being truly brutal.

Not nessasaily... I had a knight army with around 21 attack beat and longbow archer army with about 27 def about 3 times in a row...

 

[Kev]

I think this strategy is pretty level dependent.

On Deity, I'd be afraid I'd be out-teched too much to make this worthwhile. With fewer cities it seems to me that the AI (which settles land fairly quickly) would out-REX me and cause there to be one or two civs who would run off with things while I'm busy building knights and taking out one or two weaker ones - if that is even possible.

With England (playing them right now), I've had a better time Rexing out at the beginning. Their archers can hold pretty well, and instant access to dye is nice. I like better to grab as many good resource spots and block the AI with cities where possible - relying early on longbow armies to hold the gains. Concentrate on a number of gold cities and push the finances greatly. My current England Deity game I've cities all over the place and just finished rush-buying Oxford (gave me Networking - rushed Internet not long after), the Military Complex, Trade Fair and Leo's.

I did build knights, but with lots of gold I rushed them like crazy around mid-game while at tech parity. Why you ask? I was first to invention and used Atlantis to eventually get combustion. When I was ready to rush Leo's I had a tremendous upgrade to tank armies from there...

So try a fast REX and gold strat and see how it works with England. It does leverage the early Monarchy knowledge with one of the UU's nicely.

 

[ctmarco3]

To Kev: Well consider that when you take over other Civs cities you will probably learn some techs from them. Also you will gain some cities in the meantime allowing you to grow stronger to fight against the other Civs, who may be ahead in the tech race. And it is definitely "possible", I mean why wouldnt it be? Likely, now thats a different story, meaning Im not sure what your odds are, but I would say at least "fair" to "good".

Plus remember English have large Naval Support bonuses so a domination victory is entirely possible later in the game as well as possible early.

 

[damnation]

I tried Adens strategy and a freindly village gave me fueilesm(spelling) and i could just take over the contenint easily

 

[MKElderGod]

I think this strategy is pretty level dependent.

On Deity, I'd be afraid I'd be out-teched too much to make this worthwhile. With fewer cities it seems to me that the AI (which settles land fairly quickly) would out-REX me and cause there to be one or two civs who would run off with things while I'm busy building knights and taking out one or two weaker ones - if that is even possible.

With England (playing them right now), I've had a better time Rexing out at the beginning. Their archers can hold pretty well, and instant access to dye is nice. I like better to grab as many good resource spots and block the AI with cities where possible - relying early on longbow armies to hold the gains. Concentrate on a number of gold cities and push the finances greatly. My current England Deity game I've cities all over the place and just finished rush-buying Oxford (gave me Networking - rushed Internet not long after), the Military Complex, Trade Fair and Leo's.

I did build knights, but with lots of gold I rushed them like crazy around mid-game while at tech parity. Why you ask? I was first to invention and used Atlantis to eventually get combustion. When I was ready to rush Leo's I had a tremendous upgrade to tank armies from there...

So try a fast REX and gold strat and see how it works with England. It does leverage the early Monarchy knowledge with one of the UU's nicely.

not true ive beaten diety with english with only 2 cities of my own with 3 knight armies ready by 0 ad took 2 civ easily 3rd one fairly easy 4th with tanks. English are number 1 offically in my books.
1. strong early defense, offense, culture, science and navy they are truly unstoppable.

 

[MKElderGod]

also rexing out with the english is a complete waste of their potential and complete nub status.

 

[Kev]

Sorry, but beating the game on Deity with two cities and 3 knight armies would have to take a very beneficial setup. Interesting to shoot for, though I wonder where it might leave you if it fails.

Yes, one gets techs from taking over cities, but unlike CivII it does not seem to happen for every city. I seem to get a tech from the first city I take but not the others - perhaps that's a DS thing I don't know.

My point is that with the correct map on Deity it could be beneficial to beeline knights, and perhaps it allows you to eliminate some competition, but would not (to me) be a strat that will win you the game a vast majority of the time. I believe that the game is tilted to the player who can utilize the gold - get more of it and know when and where to spend it - and with this the English have some very good advantages.

Yes, later in the game when you have ships (fleets) that can properly support you, the results are incredible and should allow you to slam every coastal city. Recall that the ability comes later, however, so I choose to build up and buy myself just about all I need and quickly move from there to domination.

So MKElderGod - I believe that I am making good use of their potential by REXing and do not consider it "nub" status. With Monarchy early, make use of dye and turn it to gold from the get-go. With the Longbows hold your cities early. With increased naval support use your strong ship fleets to win you the game by guarding Atlantis and later supporting every attack on coastal cities.

Still, I'm interested in the early knights aspect and will try to see what might be done there too.

 

[MKElderGod]

Sorry, but beating the game on Deity with two cities and 3 knight armies would have to take a very beneficial setup. Interesting to shoot for, though I wonder where it might leave you if it fails.

Yes, one gets techs from taking over cities, but unlike CivII it does not seem to happen for every city. I seem to get a tech from the first city I take but not the others - perhaps that's a DS thing I don't know.

My point is that with the correct map on Deity it could be beneficial to beeline knights, and perhaps it allows you to eliminate some competition, but would not (to me) be a strat that will win you the game a vast majority of the time. I believe that the game is tilted to the player who can utilize the gold - get more of it and know when and where to spend it - and with this the English have some very good advantages.

Yes, later in the game when you have ships (fleets) that can properly support you, the results are incredible and should allow you to slam every coastal city. Recall that the ability comes later, however, so I choose to build up and buy myself just about all I need and quickly move from there to domination.

So MKElderGod - I believe that I am making good use of their potential by REXing and do not consider it "nub" status. With Monarchy early, make use of dye and turn it to gold from the get-go. With the Longbows hold your cities early. With increased naval support use your strong ship fleets to win you the game by guarding Atlantis and later supporting every attack on coastal cities.

Still, I'm interested in the early knights aspect and will try to see what might be done there too.

- The two cities = 1st the Capital set for growth than production 2nd set near dye, rushed library you might even get a scientist from monarchy. Simple as that. If it fails you wont be set behind because its early game your only getting 3 techs bronze horse and feud.
- You wont be behind in tech because Your connected to DYE Duh
- See what I learned in MP is you can utilize all the gold you want but when someone attacks you with knights and all you have are archers at best your F'ed. Thats why I like playing against the Romans Mp because they build like 5 cities when i have knights and I just add his cities to my feudel empire. See if I was rexing he would have more cities and be even that much harder if not impossible to even stop the romans when they reach their top.
-Your nub if you think rexing with the english is the best strat and the one that would win the majority of games.