15-11-2002 08:20									#61
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Well... like I said, it is not as useless as in SP, and I agree the exp / MW combo is a decent one, but still... if we're going to be on Monarch, half of the huts are in our advantage anyway. And you only have one scout... a couple of warriors can be just as good, and can be useful later as well. Sure, we know where they are first, but unless they are really close and you can archer rush them, it doesn't matter: by the time you can have horsies on their borders, you still know the first few cities (which, together with the number of cities the enemy has as viewed in the diplo screen, is all you need or a rush)

Compare these advantages to ind, mil, or rel/sci, and I don't see why everyone is so focused on it. But again, I don't own PTW yet, this is just some theoretical observation, not something that comes from using...

DeepO

	15-11-2002 08:22									#62
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by asleepathewheel Think of the power ofattacking a civ when he hasn't even found our cities?

We would of course have to be sneaky and attack from a different angle, so they think our cities are in some other direction.

	15-11-2002 08:34									#63
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

BTW, what about nbarclay?

	15-11-2002 08:34									#64
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by DeepO Well... like I said, it is not as useless as in SP, and I agree the exp / MW combo is a decent one, but still... if we're going to be on Monarch, half of the huts are in our advantage anyway. And you only have one scout... a couple of warriors can be just as good, and can be useful later as well. Sure, we know where they are first, but unless they are really close and you can archer rush them, it doesn't matter: by the time you can have horsies on their borders, you still know the first few cities (which, together with the number of cities the enemy has as viewed in the diplo screen, is all you need or a rush) Compare these advantages to ind, mil, or rel/sci, and I don't see why everyone is so focused on it. But again, I don't own PTW yet, this is just some theoretical observation, not something that comes from using... DeepO

But you can always build more scouts. And they are as cheap as warriors. And there are never bad results

All of the firaxis guys who tested the game (insert joke here) loved expansionist in MP. Granted, they weren't they players that we have on our team. Draw your own conclusions from that.

I like expansionist, but I am not adverse to industrial

	15-11-2002 08:42									#65
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

You can build more scouts... which so far I refuse to do in SP as you have a large possibility of running into barbs. warriors have a decent shot at surviving, scouts... well...

As the Firaxis testers go: I can imagine they liked it (and prolly they were rather good at the game), but on what level were they playing? If this was Emperor, I would agree, but Monarch... that's like having expansionist huts without losing another trait (a bit like the Jag warriors: get a scout, without having to miss another trait)

DeepO

	15-11-2002 08:49									#66
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Scouts can't nail Warrior / Settler pairs.

	15-11-2002 08:52									#67
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by DeepO You can build more scouts... which so far I refuse to do in SP as you have a large possibility of running into barbs. warriors have a decent shot at surviving, scouts... well... As the Firaxis testers go: I can imagine they liked it (and prolly they were rather good at the game), but on what level were they playing? If this was Emperor, I would agree, but Monarch... that's like having expansionist huts without losing another trait (a bit like the Jag warriors: get a scout, without having to miss another trait) DeepO

I didn't realize that the huts changed contents based on the level

If this is the case, then it weakens the expansionist trait considerably

Barbs don't worry me. As long as you're careful, you will be ok with scouts, staying one step ahead of the barbs. And scouts are very cheap, so its not a big deal to lose a couple.

	15-11-2002 08:54									#68
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by Theseus BTW, what about nbarclay?

I PM'd him (and Dominae and jshelr) but I have not heard back. Maybe you can be more... convincing!

	15-11-2002 08:58									#69
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

Ah, it is... was it alexman who tested the exact numbers? If so I'm sure he can comment on this.

Further: the two moves of scouts is only good to avoid barbs if you are willing to only use the first of their moves to explore new terrain: if you use your second and end next to a barb, there is no way avoiding him anymore. I lost all my scouts I ever built / started with like this.... barbs are the biggest scout bashers there are.

And as Theseus said, scouts can't nail settler teams

DeepO

	15-11-2002 09:00									#70
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Theseus Scouts can't nail Warrior / Settler pairs.

good point

	15-11-2002 09:04									#71
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

How do I address multiple recipients?

	15-11-2002 09:11									#72
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by DeepO Further: the two moves of scouts is only good to avoid barbs if you are willing to only use the first of their moves to explore new terrain: if you use your second and end next to a barb, there is no way avoiding him anymore. I lost all my scouts I ever built / started with like this.... barbs are the biggest scout bashers there are. And as Theseus said, scouts can't nail settler teams DeepO

It would appear that I am on a team with increadibly risk averse people! not that that's a bad thing

Sure you may end up next to a barb hut. Maybe, maybe not.
And that barb hut might not even have anybody home.
Scouts are cheap, they are easily replaced.

Whatever, it seems like whatever I say you will not be convinced (and likewise )

	15-11-2002 09:11									#73
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by DeepO Ah, it is... was it alexman who tested the exact numbers? If so I'm sure he can comment on this.

It was not me. It was someone from Firaxis (Mike B?) who gave the exact numbers. Catt made a summary somewhere (compiled comments from Firaxis on undocumented game features, or something) but I can't find it any more.

Even so, I remain a strong proponent of the Expansionist trait. It's one of my favorite traits in SP, and it can only get better in MP.

Having said that, the traits are so balanced that it doesn't really matter who we pick as long as we play according to the strengths of our traits.

	15-11-2002 10:10									#74
	Suffering from ads?

Gotta go to bed...

Don't know about the rest of you, but I'm pretty pumped; whatever civ we play... I wouldn't want to face us.

	15-11-2002 10:12									#75
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by Theseus Gotta go to bed... Don't know about the rest of you, but I'm pretty pumped; whatever civ we play... I wouldn't want to face us.

agreed, we certainly have a lot of civ talent on our team. regardless of our civ, we will have a great shot


maybe we should choose koreans, just to handicap ourselves

	15-11-2002 10:41									#76
	Remove this text

Why Expantionist? Since I am one of the biggest proponents of it I guess i should explain my POV.

First, you may not all be aware that I was/am play testing for Firaxis. I have been involved in many MP games against other testers. A few more post release against other opponents. Almost all of these games have been on Tiny Pangaea.

In every game that there has been an expantionist civ, they quickly become one the more powerful, if not most powerful civ in the game. This happens because extra settlers and or cities happen in at least two-thirds of starts. Even if freebies like that do not happen, they are almost always way out front in tech.

Not only do the Exp civs get no bad results, but the speed of the scout ensures they usually get as much as twice as many huts as anyone else (sometimes more).

Now, all that being said... I admit it is a gamblers start on this map. A bit. If the consensus here is for Egypt for the Rel/Ind combo, I have no problem with that.

Persia would not be so good IMO. The scientific trait does not usually play a large role in the inevitable path of conquest that the early game is when there are humans and AI in the same game. The UU is great, but there are better industrious choices with decent UUs for an ancient GA.

China? Totally out of the question going by earlier conversations (not here). We will definitely be at war in the ancient age. 60-40 against a human civ. The consensus then was that we definitely wanted an ancient UU. Even the humble WC has the retreat benefit. It would do for me given the Ind/Rel combo.

OTOH, now that reinforcements are here I am happy to revisit many of those old assumptions. I admit I am torn in many directions on the civ choice. In the end we will have to come to one and know that each possible choice would be best for some map possibility, but not all.

Last edited by notyoueither on 15-11-2002 at 10:50

	15-11-2002 12:32									#77
	Increase Your PM Length

Given the "Is Expansionist worth it?" debate, maybe we should consider the Aztecs more strongly.

1) The Jag warrior is the Scout/Warrior combo that can move quickly to discover the map and defend itself against Barbs.
(We won't get the Expansionist bonus to goody-hut results, but we'll still get some of the good points of having a scout)

2) We don't have to use the Jags to attack if we don't want to, thereby keeping our GA for later. We could attack an enemy if we see a perfect opportunity to do so, but it isn't a neccessity.

3) The Militarisitc and Religious traits are both very good. Half price temples and barracks are ideal, plus short anarchy and more elites/GL's.

bad points:
not Industrious
don't get Exp goody-hut bonus.

	15-11-2002 13:08									#78
	Got spare money?

If we do not go Exp, I really think we should go Ind.

Speed of build up is the key. Exp does this with map, settlers, etc. Ind does this by getting cities productive sooner and building communications faster.

I say one or the other is very desirable. Both would be great, except for that F-15 that goes with it.

	15-11-2002 14:40									#79
	Inflate your Upload Space

I personally believe, that in MP industrious is a very important trait, because it grants a good start even in a bad environment. Also important is it, to have an early (preferably from the start) fastmover to explore the map and pick huts. Expansionist civs have scouts, Aztecs have Jaguar Warriors, Japanese (with some luck to have horses) can build chariots, that's it. An ancient, offensive UU is an extra plus, because it can give us an early boost. The later UUs may be equally fearsome, but in my opinion a civ, that succeeded to grow big at the cost of its neighbors (human or AI) in the ancient age, will have no problems to face an attack later, when attacks are hindered by culture and happiness issues.

Here's a list of civs, that shine with at least one of these features. None of them have all 3, although Egypt is close, because WCs are only 1 tech apart, but OTOH other civs can build chariots too. I give 1 point for each feature (industrious / early fastmover / ancient offensive UU):

Americans (ind/exp) industrious / scout / - = 2 points
Iroquois (ind/exp) - / scout / MW = 2 points
Egypt (ind/rel) industrious / - / WC = 2 points
Aztecs (mil/rel) - / JW / JW = 2 points
Persia (ind/sci) industrious / - / Immortal = 2 points

Zulu (exp/mil) - / scout / - = 1 point
Vikings (exp/mil) - / scout / - = 1 point
Mongols (exp/mil) - / scout / - = 1 point
Arabs (ind/rel) - / scout / - = 1 point
China (ind/mil) industrious / - / - = 1 point
Japan (rel/mil) - / chariot / - = 1 point
Celts (rel/mil) - / - / gallic swordsman = 1 point
French (ind/com) [i]industrious / - / -[i] = 1 point
Ottomans (ind/sci) [i]industrious / - / -[i] = 1 point

So in my opinion, we should choose our civ out of the first five (those with 2 features). I personally would prefer the Iroquois, although I'd be content with the Americans, Egyptians, Aztecs and Persians as well.

One word about the Germans: They have none of these features, but have all techs for an archer rush from the start. If we build 4 warriors, settler, 2 barracks (optional) and from now on churn out archers and spearmen in both cities, I guess no neighbor can stand. But we must have a near neighbor and strike from the very start, as after at most 40 turns the advantage will be leveled out. The Germans remain an option, although an hazardous one I admit.

EDIT: Added Persia... how could I forget them?

Last edited by Sir Ralph on 15-11-2002 at 21:06

	15-11-2002 15:07									#80
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Very good break down Sir ralph. I was playing around as Egypt. I could go for them as well as Iroquois and hope to be close to an AI.

50-50 for me now, given the risk of island start or Archi.

	15-11-2002 16:54									#81
	Support Apolyton

I favored the Iroqouis, but now that i see that having good-goody-huts isn't such a big advantage, i'd rather stick with Persia-for the UU and scientific, or Egypt.

All in all, there's no big difference between each civ, and most of it comes down to how we play it, as alexman and NYE said.

	15-11-2002 18:28									#82
	Support Apolyton

So it seems , that the first hostile activity has begun
start here

Gengisfarb has a point though, time to do some pre-game diplomacy with lego (spiffor)???
If they all gang up on us, it could get very tough( fun, but tough )

	15-11-2002 18:47									#83
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by alva848 time to do some pre-game diplomacy with lego (spiffor)???

working on it

	15-11-2002 19:14									#84
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

NYE,

Thank you for setting forth your reasoning for choosing Expansionist. I have never played an MP game, and therefore I value the experience of those who do.

Given that, I will amend my rankings:

1) Egypt. Still.
2) Iroquois. Good points by NYE
3) Persia
4) China

I won't be upset whatever we choose... I just want to make sure we debate this properly.

-Arrian

	15-11-2002 19:35									#85
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Any of the above are fine for me too.

	15-11-2002 19:58									#86
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by asleepathewheel It would appear that I am on a team with increadibly risk averse people! not that that's a bad thing

Well... scouts have the most uses in the early game, and early on I'm not for taking big risks, no. Everything is way too costly. I have to admit that of course I'd use the 2 moves of scouts as well, I was trying to make a point

As to being convinced: I can't be until I played it myself. Of course I respect the opinions here, so I'll gladly play with the Iroquois if they are the choice, but from the other hand I'll play every race, in every position if that's the groups wish. I horserush a lot in my games, so their UU will be useful, even if it means giving up some other advantage (like Ind.)

NYE, thanks for the explanation indeed. The problem I'm having is that I don't have a good feeling as to what will make MP tick, I can theorize on it, but I don't feel it. I'll take your word that exp has been a very good trait in previous games, but boy, would I like to test this before deciding it first!

As to Sir Ralph's focus on industrious: I like it, but don't consider it that important... but as said before we really should have one of the culture traits (sci or rel). If we get one of those two I won't object any choice you make. Even if I'd prefer something else, it won't ever place us in a bad position, it will only changes the view and possible plans for our game. So it becomes a matter of personal choice

DeepO

	15-11-2002 20:22									#87
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by Sir Ralph Arabs (ind/rel) industrious / - / - = 1 point

Aren't these guys expansionist/religious? They still get only one point, but they are basically the Iroquois with fast Knights instead of MW. But they could be a better option, if we want a Middle Ages GA and just take out the easy AIs in the Ancient age with normal units... just a thought.

Three-move knights!

	15-11-2002 21:10									#88
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Sorry, my bad, fixed. Also, the French and Ottomans (both industrious) were missing in the 1 point group.

DeepO: I'm not fixed on industrious at all, that shows my top civ choice (Iroquois). In my opinion in MP the civ will win, that succeeds to grow as fast as possible as big as possible. And industrious (among other traits) helps to achieve this by making the tile usage faster efficient.

	15-11-2002 21:12									#89
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Ok, I think we've pretty much hashed out the arguments for and against the main contenders. I think we can all pretty much agree that this is mostly a debate over risk vs. reward.

I'm taking a cautious, more flexible line. Those who prefer the Iroquois are willing to gamble, feeling that the gamble has good odds of paying off. It is worth noting that those advocating the Iroquois are the ones with MP experience.

Granted, we have some time before the game starts, but I think we're best served to choose our civ soon so we move on to discussing other things. Are we going to end up tallying 1st, 2nd and 3rd choices like the other teams appear to have done, or use a run-off poll, or what?

-Arrian

	15-11-2002 21:20									#90
	Increase the size of your Attachments

Arrian: Choosing expansionist is only partially gambling. Yes, huts can have neat stuff (if managing the build queue, that is), but the main reason to choose them is quick knowledge of the map, luxuries and resources and to have a fastmoving spy to sneak a peek in enemy territory and getting back out without being seen inside. Map trading among human players, btw, is considered to be a big nono, so the worth of the scouts increases still more.