 |
| |
|
|
Arnelos
|
 |
of the Free World
Sep 2002
time: 00:23
|
|
Well, I HAVE been playing Spain lately, including a multi-player game with my friend (he's playing the Ottomons). I have found Spain VERY VERY USEFUL for warmongering (which I was forced into by the English, then the Arabs, then the Celts, then the Arabs again ALL declaring war on me). My Ottmon friend couldn't really help me because he was fighting Babylon and Germany on the other side (we sorta fought hordes of AI player while standing back-to-back).
Spain was VERY EFFECTIVE at building temples quick for preventing flips to the AI civs and was VERY EFFECTIVE at overcoming corruption with the large empire I have been amassing by conquering first England, then parts of Arabia, then the Celts, then the rest of Arabia.
That's my one MULTI-PLAYER GAME with the Spanish.
As for single-player...
My first game I did an excellent job of expanding very far pretty quickly (I was lucky to start very far away from my rivals on a large continent). I fought my first wars in the early mid Middle Ages and used conquistadores and medieval infantry to stomp all over first the Germans and then the French.
My other single-player game as the Spanish I beat the snot out of the Vikings with swordsmen (long before they ever got to building those beserks).
By far the best quality of playing the Spanish is the commerical trait because it makes a large and quickly expanding empire PROFITABLE. Having the religious trait to consolidate borders quickly helps a good deal with this. They have no real advantages for either a specific builder strategy (no industrialist trait) and none for warmongering, either (lousy UU and no militarist trait).
They're basically a midway civ between Builder and Warmonger strats that's most effective if you manage to survive and build a sizable empire. They ARE, however, more vulnerable in the early stages without industrious, militaristic, or expansionist (the best early-stage traits) or an early UU. If we survive to the Middle Ages, they can seriously rock with cheap Cathedrals, getting golden age with building either Michelangelo's or JS Bach's, and a late-medieval UU as insurance for that.
Oh, and EVERY SINGLE GAME I've played Spain, I started in a desert, though lucky enough to start on a river in the desert. Unfortunately, I only got 2-3 hills tiles in each of those games to put mines on... so Madrid's production has been lousy in all three of those games. That's entirely chance, of course 
----------------
CONCLUSION:
Carthage would be more survivable in the very early stages of the game, but DOES expand more slowly due to the price of the Numidian Mercenary. You can also end up with a very early GA if anyone attacks you that early. Their industrious and commercial traits, however, are VERY VALUABLE throughout the game, especially if they grow a sizable empire (commercial is more and more valuable the larger you get and industrious helps a fewer number of workers do the same work on a sizable empire).
Spain is somewhat vulnerable very early on due to the lack of militaristic, industrious, or even expansionist traits and the lack of an early UU. However, the religious trait can help early-on with border expansion and keeping populations content. Spain does have the ability (if their starting location is decent...) to expand quickly and take advantage of expanded outposts quickly (cheap temples and 25% reduction in corruption). Spain shines a bit later on with cheap cathedrals and marketplaces along with reduced corruption.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
mrmitchell
|
|
I'm cool with Carthage and Spain.
Great Ruler Togas, I present to you, as your and Carthage's humble servant, a "Join Plan" suggestion. 
1. Before the game begins (i.e. before Dec. 1) anyone can join either by joining the CivGroup, posting a "I'm in" post, OR both. (CivGroup is probably most preffered.)
2. After the game has begun, a new member must be able to prove he has never been in the PTWDG before. (The Admin will hopefully handle double-logins.) If he quit a team previous, he must sign a contract stating that he will not join the same or another team again for (at least 30) turns.
3. After a member has been proven beyond a doubt just a dude out to wreck everything, a 66% majority poll will be held in the main PtW forum to kick the member permanently or temporarily from the Democracy Game.
4. Related to rule number 3, if a team specifically sent that person to sabatoge the game or collect important information, a 50% majority poll will be held to reprimand (no turn for x turns/trade embargo/something else) the team sending that person. Or, if this happens enough, a 50% majority poll can be held on whether to start a poll to kick that team out of the game. If this poll passes, a 66% majority poll will be held to kick the team out.
5. 10 spy incidents will immediately start a 50% majority poll on team kick-out.
Remember, this is just a plan: yet I think it's a good one. Please reply with your (de)constructive critisism.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
History Guy
|
 |
Reads too many books...
Oct 2001
time: 23:23
|
|
OK. I've been thinking hard on this one.
Spain has a good amount of things going for it. It has great traits, and it has good abilities to expand quickly. However, if we choose Spain, we might never get out of the ancient age without a good UU. With the Builders as Carthage and the Warmongers as the Celts, you know it's going to be tough on someone, and personally, I don't like the idea of ending up next door to Brennus, as we surely will, as both of us are European civs. Also, the UU is, well, unassuming. It adds little to the arsenal other than an explorer who can fight. However, a Medieval Golden Age might be a good thing, especially with Cathedrals around, and Magellan's Voyage, and etc.
The Carthaginians are superb builders, with a great, al beit expensive UU. They would definitely make it through the ancient period, but we'd get an early Golden Age when attacked, and empire-building and research would be slow going.
I am really stuck here. I'd like to see a few more votes before I decide on this one.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
History Guy
|
|
Reads too many books...
Oct 2001
time: 23:23
|
|
Scrapped!!
Last edited by History Guy on 13-11-2002 at 04:36
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Arnelos
|
|
of the Free World
Sep 2002
time: 00:23
|
|
I vote to keep Carthage (in part just because everyone else is voting to give them up )
That said, I can understand why people want to give it up. The Numidian Merc IS expensive, but it will act as a powerful deterrant to would-be invaders in the Ancient Age. Carthage also has the very powerful industrious/commercial combo that allow for faster construction, faster workers, and reduced corruption all in one civ.
They are, indeed, best suited to a builder style in the Ancient Age, but are suited to building a larger empire (by whatever means necessary) beyond the Ancient Age.
That said, I'm totally happy with Spain. I've grown to like them quite a bit by playing them in single-player and with my friend in multi-player. The lack of a truly usable UU (do you really think people won't defend their cities when they know we're Spain???) is a problem, but the enormous utility of Religious+Commercial for the early Middle Age is very tempting (along with the long-term utility of that 1-turn government type change).
Both are commercial, so I'm happy (that being the civ trait I wanted no matter what )
|
|
| |
|
|
|
History Guy
|
|
Reads too many books...
Oct 2001
time: 23:23
|
|
OK, sorry for procrastination...
Please ignore that other post. I reconsidered things.
Carthage is a survivor and a good builder, something that we know will definitely last the Ancient Age to grow an empire later on. The Numidian Mercenaries out do Spearmen and Pikemen, and are just as good as archers. Carthage has it downsides, of course, but all civilizations do. It's to be expected. Carthage is a survivor that can build a real empire.
Spain, on the other hand, might well never survive the Ancient Age. I say this knowing what we have as far as competition. The warmongers have chosen the Celts, and Spain and the land of the Celts would end up, due to their European backround, close together on the world map, correct? If so, the Spanish would undoubtedly be taking a heavy attack sometime from the Gallic Swordsmen of Brennus, and these guys are tough. No spearman is going to hold up long. As Spain, we'd be a sitting duck in the Ancient Age. Also, the UU isn't good at all. Sure, we are fast on all terrain, can strike workers fast, and etc., but at what cost? The Conquistador costs 70 shields, the regular explorer, 20. The Spearman costs 20 shields. The Numidian Mercenary, 30. Add it up. There's a lot more to go for where Carthage is concerned.
Hold onto Carthage, we don't want to get conquered in the Ancient Age, before we've even had a chance to thrive.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
dejon
|
|
For arguments given here and much earlier - Carthage.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
mrmitchell
|
|
Finally, a private forum!
Can I change my vote again? Or better yet, just scrap it until 47 hours has passed? I'm sorry, but all the good arguments Arnelos is giving is making me go loopy...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
ruby_maser
|
 |
Fear sunshine!
Sep 2002
time: 23:23
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Arnelos
Let's say Spain has their capital with 4 production at size 3 - thus obtaining the spear/settler combo in 13 turns.
Let's say Carthage has their capital with 5 production (they're industrious) at size 3 - thus obtaining the Numidian Merc/settler combo in 12 turns.
|
Just to clarify, the extra shield will not kick in until the town gains "CITY" status (ie: above a 6)... so do not count on the extra shield in the early game.
Anyway, to me, a well organized attack from an enemy is gonna take out 3 spearman or 2 numidian mercs. regardless. Its not that we can build more spearman. That is not the reasoning; its is rather that the rate of growth in the early game is the game. It is the number of cities you have that assure a good allocation of resources, that generate commerce, generate culture, generate deterance to war or the means to make war, and so on and so on.
I cannot see rising above a bad start location with a slow-starter like this.
Last edited by ruby_maser on 13-11-2002 at 07:40
|
|
| |
|
|
|
dejon
|
|
It may be too late to change it, but what about The Thespians for the team name?
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:23.
Apolyton Time is 00:23. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
13-11-2002 02:31
. I believe that a small favor now might become a bridge for future cooperation in the game itself.
)
if everyone doesnt figure out that's our strategy... 
perhaps that is why I'm wary 
|