 |
|
Kekkonen
|
|
Turku, Finland
Nov 2001
time: 07:16
|
|
I'm just starting out, I'm currently in the middle of my first game on Warlord (working up the difficulty one level at the time) as the Indians. I have to say, if you don't have Iron and Horses, the War Elephants can probably save the day, but if you have plenty of both, they're kind of lame. Same stats as the knight, which is what they replace.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Eli
|
|
Israel
Jul 2000
time: 07:16
|
|
Immortals. It's great to annihilate our enemies early in the game.
Hoplites are great too, keeps you undefeatable in big part of the early game. The Babylonian bowmen are also useful, but they cant be upgraded to more advanced defence units so you still have to build those spearmen.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
EricWright
|
|
My vote goes to immortals. I've played Germans, but not far enough to get Panzers, Aztecs (Jag warriors aren't great... just one extra movement), and Romans. Legionaries are pretty good, but I prefer the Immortals. The bad thing is not finding any iron near by, though.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Venger
|
|
Keeper of the Can-O'Whoopass
Jan 1970
time: 23:16
|
|
I keep hearing people talk about immortal being all that great - but are they REALLY? I submit the legion is superior.
The values of the immortal are 4/2/1, the legion 3/3/1. About the same, yes? Except for one thing. The defensive value can me modified, and the offensive value cannot. A fortified legion is equal to an immortal on defense, but an immortal is outmatched defending fortified against a legion. Even without fortification, the advantage the immortal has on offense of 33% is outweighed by the 50% advantage the legion has against it. This percentage is exacerbated the more it is modified.
4 immortals attack 3 legions with 50% defense bonus:
Likely outcome - 4 dead immortals, one dead and two damaged legions.
4 legions attack 3 immortals with 50% defensive bonus:
Likely outcome - many. You will likely see one strong legion and one weak legion facing either one weak immortal or ZERO weak immortals. You could also get 3 damaged and one full strength legion with the immortals wiped out as often as you get one strong against two weak immortals.
The legion is the superior overall unique unit.
Venger
|
|
| |
|
|
|
dr.charm
|
|
Man-o-war is piece-o-crap, IMHO. I have to admit a certain like of the Babylonian Bowman. In the very early game, it lets you launch an attack without having to use spearmen to back it up/hold towns. I had good experiences with it.
Cheers,
Dr. Charm
|
|
| |
|
|
|
kalishatra
|
|
best: Jag warriors. their early rush is terrifying. "only have an extra movement" indeed lol
Mounted warriors: a small horde can take down any defending civ, imnsho.
Immortals: yeah, baby. punch punch punch.
Samurai: militaristic civ, good attack, best defense for their time. they advance to elite, and stay alive, for ultimate leader generation. don't need horses, and can retreat.
Worst: F-15 (never seen one, never will)
Man-o-War: what a joke
Musketeer: yuck
Egyptian Chariot: yay. basically allows you to build horsemen one tech in advance. but you likely don't yet have horses or the infrastructure to make a significant army.
Last edited by kalishatra on 20-11-2001 at 03:47
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lord Cannager
|
|
Cincinnati, Ohio
Nov 2001
time: 00:16
|
|
i pick the immortals or the samurai. probably the samurai
________________________________________
"Friends, Romans, Countrymen lend me your ears."
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Karhgath
|
|
Venger:
What are you talking about? Since the attack CANNOT be modified, but the defense can, having a better offense is a LOT more important than a better defense, so, the Immortal is the best between them and legions, if you go by that logic, hehe.
Also, if you do the Legion vs Immortal, here how it goes, both time with 50% defense :
Immortal A:4
Legion D: 3 (+50%=4, unless it's round up, which I doubt)
So, you effectively have 4 vs 4.
4/(4+4) = 50%
If it's round down, it would be 4/9 = 44%.
Legion A:3
Immortal D: 2 (+50%=3)
So, you effectively have 3 vs 3.
3/(3+3) = 50%
That means that, according to what we know about the combat system, both are the same (50% outcome each time).
If it's round up, ok, a legion defending against an immortal have a slihter higher chance of surviving than the opposite, BUT, usually, you do not defend with Immortals anyway, so it's a moot point.
So, your example doesn't actually works at all, just to point that out, not that I don't like Legion, just that your reasoning is flawed =)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
GePap
|
 |
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001
time: 23:16
|
|
I would have to say that a legion is overall better than an immortal because it's more versitile. Everyone keeps saying how wonderful hoplites are, well legions have the same defense. Immortals are better at mounting an attack, but think if the enemy has good units to counterattck? The immortals will probably die while the legions will have a good chance of surviving. So you can launch an entire major campaign with legions only since they do all. Also, into the medeival ag,e knights (or elephants, samurai, and riders) have as good an attack as immortals but get to retreat, so at this stage, while immortals are still O.K., they are generally outclassed. The legions on the other hand, due to their defense of 3 can till chug along. Of course, both have the problem of not being upgradeable.
I also have to say that I had some good successes with attacking musketeers, so they are not as bad as everyone says.
With the Air superiority bug, F-15 can't kill anything: by far the worst. Once this is fixed then men-of-war will be the worst.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sabre2th
|
|
My vote would probably go to the Immortal, but people seem to be ignoring the Chinese rider. The extra defense and movement point give it quite an advantage.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Venger
|
|
Keeper of the Can-O'Whoopass
Jan 1970
time: 23:16
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Karhgath
Venger:
What are you talking about? Since the attack CANNOT be modified, but the defense can, having a better offense is a LOT more important than a better defense, so, the Immortal is the best between them and legions, if you go by that logic, hehe.
Also, if you do the Legion vs Immortal, here how it goes, both time with 50% defense :
Immortal A:4
Legion D: 3 (+50%=4, unless it's round up, which I doubt)
So, you effectively have 4 vs 4.
4/(4+4) = 50%
If it's round down, it would be 4/9 = 44%.
Legion A:3
Immortal D: 2 (+50%=3)
So, you effectively have 3 vs 3.
3/(3+3) = 50%
That means that, according to what we know about the combat system, both are the same (50% outcome each time).
If it's round up, ok, a legion defending against an immortal have a slihter higher chance of surviving than the opposite, BUT, usually, you do not defend with Immortals anyway, so it's a moot point.
So, your example doesn't actually works at all, just to point that out, not that I don't like Legion, just that your reasoning is flawed =) |
My reasoning is 100% on the money, and your example showed it. A legion attacking an immortal has a better shot than an immortal attacking a legion. The reason for this is exactly as I stated - because only the defense is modifiable, any advantage of one unit over the other in defense is exacerbated.
For this reason, the legion is the superior unit.
Venger
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Alexzandro
|
|
San Bernardino, CA
Nov 2001
time: 21:16
|
|
Like I was saying, there's a 50/50 chance between them. Depends who's attacking from what terrain. Mountains give 100% defense increase. All it matters is that modifier, plus the defense increase by being fortified. So your reasoning is just the same with every unit. Like I said before, only the bonuses matter at the end. BTW, there is special units weaker than others and vice versa (e.g legion or swordsman vs. any archer unit). Taking this to perspective, that's another bonus. So lets review.
1. Terrain bonus
2. regular stats
3. Fortification
4. special bonus units against other units,, excluding the above bonuses. (read e.g)
And I swore, that modifier you gave doesn't explain it completely. There is a special bonus for units against other units, which I believe increase both (i.e str/def).
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lord Chambers
|
|
The way to be successful in Civ is to get an advantage early on. By conquering passive barbarians you can get a huge tech advantage, which is good in it of self, and great for diplomacy. This is why it's great to play as an expantionist, so you can use those cheap scouts to find great city spots, passive barbarians, and hostile ones. When you find the hostile ones and die, you can follow up with an archer for some money and training.
Now here's how I relate this fact (expansionist is good) to UU's. The Jagaur Warrior is a scout that can take out barbarians as they go! They could also conquer any undefended enemy civ's cities, although I've never seen this happen in Civ 3. You can achieve an even greater early advantage by triggering a golden age. I got one when I only had three cities. It may seem wasted, but the extra archers I made allowed me to conquer the Germans, which were already huge and would have been a thorn through the whole game. Lastly, they retreat in losing battles, so you can save your army from death. I like to use them like gurilla warrors. You attack, start to lose, and flee off to the moutains. They enemy folows, and attack your fortified, healed, terrain advantageous unit, and die.
And while I'm at it, the Aztecs are also great because of their religious and militaristic traits. You get more promotions while fighting with your semi-expantionist Jauguar Warriors, and then you can build temples easily to cause your culture to blossom. The Aztecs are basically a three bonus civ, with their UU making them expansionist, their religousness complementing the rapid city expansion, and the military as an added bonus.
I fear my message might not be clear enough, so here they are, plus a couple extras.
Jauguar Warriors are the best because:
1. They make the Aztecs expantionist, which complement their other traits.
2. They allow you to get an advantage early on, though their scoutness and ability to cause a golden age.
3. Even though they often lose becuase they have 1 attack and 1 defense, they retreat which allows you to overcome superior forces with cheap units.
4. They increase your range of ability to wage war, which is vital early on with tiny civs and no units faster that 1 square per turn.
5. It doesn't really matter that they aren't upgradable, because they are just faster warriors :-)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Deathray
|
|
High Wycombe
Oct 2001
time: 05:16
|
|
The immortal, legion and hoplite are all favourites of mine. The immortal is great, as you can steamroller over any ancient unit except for the legion and the hoplite. That 4 attack is very, very nice, but its quite important to send a couple of spearmen with them, just to soak up the hits from swordsmen. The Legion is a very nice, very balanced unit. I think I prefer the immortal though, just because I tend to make sure that I hit from the mountain. The Legion is definitely a very impressive unit though. The Greek hoplite is truely a great unit though. It is a very cheap, very effective defender and it can be upgraded to musketmen later on. I have to say that the hoplite/swordsmen technique is probably better than the Legion. Now if only I could get hoplites with immortals.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:16.
Apolyton Time is 00:16. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
19-11-2001 17:48
|