 |
|
Arc
|
|
Playing in regant level, i start up with greeks and start expanding. Later on i have about 13 cities and am well implanted on the continent, and here comes my neighbours the persian with... 10 immortals, 7 warriors, 5 spearmen.
Myself i barely 1 hoplit per cities, 2 hoplite with barracks on border cities.
My first 3 borders cities are owned.
Don't you think immortals are a bit unbalanced? Knights attack power way before knights appear, and destroying the best anciaent age defender like it was nothing.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Darkworld Ark
|
|
of the Capitalists
May 2002 time: 05:22
|
|
You should attack the Immortals with horsemen & swordmen, since they only have 2 defence.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
vondrack

|
 |
Praha, Czech Republic
Jan 2002 time: 06:22
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Darkworld Ark
You should attack the Immortals with horsemen & swordmen, since they only have 2 defence. |
...and get iron & swordsmen ASAP. There is only one effective and possible defense against Immortals - the defense in depth. You need a well-roaded battlefield, a mix of swordsmen/horsemen/archers (whatever you are able to put together) and a little bit of luck.
The key is to never let immortals attack - always attack them before they can attack you. Let them approach your units first, then - when they are in your territory, slow and unable to heal - strike (taking advantage of the roads), and withdraw to safety. Do your best to finish off wounded immortals in order to keep their numbers down (if you let them withdraw, heal, and return back to the battlefield, you will eventually be facing too many of them and the defense will become difficult). This way, with a little bit of practise, you can defend successfully even against immortals... at least I did, twice in my Civ3 career - and I remember those two (Regent) games with sort of pride... 
Playing Greeks should be an extra advantage for you, as these are tough defenders if stationed upon hills or mountains, across rivers, or fortified cities.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Lord Merciless
|
|
There are at least counters against an Immortal rush, but how do you defend against a Legionnary rush without using Immortals?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Tiberius

|
 |
Europe
Jan 2000 time: 06:22
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Theseus
Gotta get to them first... at all costs. If playing Egypt, for instance, with cultural linking on, I'll not build any twons beyond Thebes, and just go all Warrior, all the time, until I know I've got Caesar in hand. |
My strategy is probably not so effective, but ... it is mine and I like it 
Playing with the egyptians, I beat Caesar with culture flipping. The romans don't build any culture related buildings in the beginning and I try to put my cities near (and, if possiblle, between) their cities and rush some temples and libraries. Because of this culture rush I'm weak militarily and constantly paying tribute to the romans. After a while the roman cities start to flip one after another and soon Caesar becomes nothing more than a poor begger. 
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Tiberius

|
 |
Europe
Jan 2000 time: 06:22
|
|
You're probably right, nearby Romans, Persians, and Iroquois are very dangerous and, like you said, they need to be trimmed. I did it in my last game, I destroyed the Iroquois with my Immortals (playing Persia).
It's just I enjoy more building, not destroying, and cities flipping to join my empire is more satisfactory to me.
Just for the record, my strategy is not only funny, it is also quite effective (though not always, and I'm sure less effective than yours). In my egyptian games the romans are always poor shadows of the great Roman Empire after I get half of their cities without fight. The rest is easy to conquer.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Arrian
|
 |
Kneel before Grog!
Jul 2001 time: 00:22
|
|
The Romans and Persians are two civs I will go out of my way to hurt or destroy in the very early going. Don't let them get iron! That's suicide. A targetted strike of warriors, archers or even swordsmen (depending on how hard Caesar/Xerxes has to work at getting iron hooked up) is the way to go.
Personally, I fear the legionary more than the immortal, because I can kill the immortal by attacking it (horse/sword, as described above). The legionary is... well, have you ever seen Full Metal Jacket? There is a character called "Animal Mother." That's the CivIII legionary. One tough sonufa*****. They die hard.
Generally, it is best to cripple or kill any civ that has an ancient UU. I tend to try and avoid Babylon until I have a large horseman force that I can unleash on them (thus killing them quickly, so their golden age doesn't help them). I will try to avoid very early war vs. the Aztecs as well, but no longer fear them once I have horses 'n swords. I avoid Greece like the plague until Chivalry.
To answer the original question, no, the Immortals aren't unbalancing. Powerful yes, unbalancing no. Like most of the other UU's, it gets a +1 bonus to 1 stat (+1 offense from standard swordsman). The key with immortals is that they are slow. Build some horsemen and run rings around them.
-Arrian
|
|
|  |
 |
|
jshelr
|
 |
pittsburgh
Apr 2002 time: 00:22
|
|
"Later on i have about 13 cities....."
You felt unprepared when attacked. I just wanted to add that I've literally not had 13 cities before stopping to build an attacking force for ages on a standard map. The AI expand too long and it leaves them ripe for plundering. I think what you did here was REX too long.
Last edited by jshelr on 05-09-2002 at 18:14
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:22. Apolyton Time is 00:22. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|