Winning with Ragnar...

[itg]

Well, I am pretty new at playing Rags, but the techers like Masa and Ghandi race out hopelessly ahead of me, and I can't compete with the other military dudes without metal. If I wanted to play for a peaceful Cultural Victory, I'd stick with Ramesses. I've already done that 1,000 times! I want a change -- WAR. It doesn't make much sense with Ragnar to by-pass the medieval wars when that is where Rag's UU comes into play. I did listen to that PodCast 96 episode from our British friend, and somewhere in there TMIT says you need a good starting position with Rags to win at the high playing levels. To me that means you need metal.

Well, if you absolutely insist on playing the game one way (and there's nothing wrong with that--I do it myself now and then) the best thing to do is keep reloading until you get a start that supports your ambitions. You'll probably have better luck hoping iron shows up in one of your cities than sacrificing your economy to know you don't have it.

 

[Ramesses-Rules]

Ramesses (or Hatty) is good for war, too. The War Chariot is a very strong rushing UU, probably in the top 5.

Military traits like Aggressive or Imperialistic are not necessary to play warmongering games. In fact, many people prefer to have an economic trait like Organized or Financial. It can indirectly help with war even more than a military trait can.

I agree with all that. I often do a War Chariot rush with Ramesses to get good land early in the game and then go Culture Victory path thereafter.

I wanted to try Ragnar who is Financial, which I have already seen is very helpful. Aggressive is very sweet if you can get metal early, but then I guess that is why I rarely get easy access to metal at Immortal with Rags. I luckily got it in my current game, and I am definitely kicking some butt! Anyway, he has been fun to play so far.

 

[Ramesses-Rules]

Well, if you absolutely insist on playing the game one way (and there's nothing wrong with that--I do it myself now and then) the best thing to do is keep reloading until you get a start that supports your ambitions. You'll probably have better luck hoping iron shows up in one of your cities than sacrificing your economy to know you don't have it.

See, I would say -- once you discover that Bronze is not available -- if you don't research Ironworking before you put out your third city you are just playing for luck. Yes, it puts a strain on your economy, but the risk of not going this route (at least in the 12+ Immortal games I have played so far with Rags) is that you are likely stuck with no metal. That is a hard position to play from, especially if you are a military civilization. I'd like to hear from some people who play often with Rags whether they go for Alphabet ahead of Ironworking. I do that all the time with Ramesses, but I don't think it is a smart move with Rags.

 

[itg]

See, I would say -- once you discover that Bronze is not available -- if you don't research Ironworking before you put out your third city you are just playing for luck. Yes, it puts a strain on your economy, but the risk of not going this route (at least in the 12+ Immortal games I have played so far with Rags) is that you are likely stuck with no metal. That is a hard position to play from, especially if you are a military civilization.

You're only playing for luck if you insist on metal, which is only necessary if you insist on classical/medieval war. Since you do insist, you may as well play an optimal start and reload when it goes wrong, rather than gun for metal so hard you can't take advantage of it once you get it.

I'd like to hear from some people who play often with Rags whether they go for Alphabet ahead of Ironworking. I do that all the time with Ramesses, but I don't think it is a smart move with Rags.

It's every bit as smart a play with Rags as it is with Ramesses. Assume you don't get metal. What have you lost compared to your Ramesses wins where you didn't go to war? The issue I think is you want your Berserkers to see some action. I certainly don't blame you, but you'll probably have better results playing several games until Berserkers become viable, rather than try to force the issue at the expense of most of your winning chances.

That aside, IMO the trading post is much more fun. that movement bonus plus the circumnavigation bonus makes naval warfare a joy. So what if you end up using rifles rather than Berserkers?

Last time I played Ragnar on immortal I had copper, so I guess the fact I went Alpha before IW doesn't mean much to you. But FWIW, in 8 of the 9 games I've won on my current computer, I won by domination or diplomation, and in all but one I went Alpha or Aesthetics before IW. In three of those games my first war was with rifles, and in all of them most of the war was rifles or later. Some of the leaders were typical warmongers, some weren't.

 

[Ramesses-Rules]

Last time I played Ragnar on immortal I had copper, so I guess the fact I went Alpha before IW doesn't mean much to you. But FWIW, in 8 of the 9 games I've won on my current computer, I won by domination or diplomation, and in all but one I went Alpha or Aesthetics before IW. In three of those games my first war was with rifles, and in all of them most of the war was rifles or later. Some of the leaders were typical warmongers, some weren't.

If I have Copper, then I would definitely go for Alphabet and trade it for Ironworking, Mathematics, and other goodies as I always do with Ramesses. Since I always play for Cultural Victory with Ramesses, I can take advantage of my wonder-building and Temple building. I don't have that much of an easy path to cultural victory with Rags because he does not have the same assets as Ramesses. I'd like to hear somebody tell me they won at Immortal playing Rags with no metal. I am not saying it's impossible, but I am dubious. My hat would be off to them.

 

[Ramesses-Rules]

Last time I played Ragnar on immortal I had copper, so I guess the fact I went Alpha before IW doesn't mean much to you. But FWIW, in 8 of the 9 games I've won on my current computer, I won by domination or diplomation, and in all but one I went Alpha or Aesthetics before IW. In three of those games my first war was with rifles, and in all of them most of the war was rifles or later. Some of the leaders were typical warmongers, some weren't.

If I have Copper, then I would definitely go for Alphabet and trade it for Ironworking, Mathematics, and other goodies as I always do with Ramesses. Since I always play for Cultural Victory with Ramesses, I can take advantage of my wonder-building and Temple building. I don't have that much of an easy path to cultural victory with Rags because he does not have the same assets as Ramesses. I'd like to hear somebody tell me they won at Immortal playing Rags with no metal. I am not saying it's impossible, but I am dubious. My hat would be off to them.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Immortal in warlords is properly hard.

If you consider AI super hax bonuses, cheating, and fake difficulty as "proper" . IMO "properly hard" is what we see gradually (but with notable consistency) appearing in BBAI, where it needs fewer and fewer bonuses to screw you.

Oh, and trait/unique variance in this game is relatively minor. A good start makes more difference than any trait. It's more than possible and frequently easy to win the game without traits or uniques, so before you start pigeon-holing I'd suggest learning to play with more stock things and get used to the differences, so you get to the point where you can actually recognize when niche strategies and unusual things are viable...possibly the best play.

 

[ParadigmShifter]

Nope, as the poster hinted at, proper means "very" in Britain British slang.

EDIT: e.g. "I was properly pissed yesterday! I shagged a right proper minger! She was such a moose, she had antlers! Proper antlers!!!"

EDIT2: I'll try and use proper in context in tomorrows live PodCast

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Nope, as the poster hinted at, proper means "very" in Britain British slang.

EDIT: e.g. "I was properly pissed yesterday! I shagged a right proper minger!"

More like abuse-ridden. Reminds me of the game demon's souls. That game seems really hard. Then you realize that you can cheese almost all of it and it is...less hard.

 

[ParadigmShifter]

I suck at war though I can only win fairly peacefully on immortal (in BtS). Working on my first Monarch conquest (quick speed though, so harder) for GMaj80 (I'll finally get my QM though!).