 |
|  |
 |
|
DeepO

|
 |
supporting Candle'Bre
Jan 2002 time: 06:23
|
|
alexman, you forget the biggest reason why we would need one: one early temple does as much to culture in 2000 years as 3 temples do, built 1000 years later. Economically, the equation is quite simple, the upkeep of that lone temple is a lot lower (even if it comes earlier).
But I agree, if we are too close to a human, offensive, civ, we should protect our cities first, thus having to divert more resources to culture later on. It would be a disadvantage, but if the situation says we can't build an early temple, we can't....
Oh, and don't worry about the barracks, as a religious civ temples are as expensive as a single attacker... they won't mean you don't got barracks, but you will have one unit less. (or 1.5 unit less)
DeepO
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Dominae
|
|
Ah, I actually have someone on my side! I think alexman's four conditions are right on. Basically the point is that no "cultural investment" should be made until quite late in the early-game (if you know what I mean). Does anyone think that Temples should be built before those conditions are met? IMO that's the real question at issue here.
Dominae
|
|
|  |
 |
|
asleepathewheel
|
|
listening too long to one song
Mar 2002 time: 00:23
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Dominae
Ah, I actually have someone on my side! I think alexman's four conditions are right on. Basically the point is that no "cultural investment" should be made until quite late in the early-game (if you know what I mean). Does anyone think that Temples should be built before those conditions are met? IMO that's the real question at issue here.
Dominae |
I agree.
I would add that a temple would be necessary when we can see new resources that might be one square away from control.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
DeepO

|
 |
supporting Candle'Bre
Jan 2002 time: 06:23
|
|
Alexman, I can live with your rules, except with the 'early warfare means immediate barrack' thing. In my games, that temple gets built before barracks are available. But of course, this is in SP, and it generally means you don't have a lot of defensive units present (or you don't have many scouts). The trick here is that if you do it really early, you can't be attacked anyway... and after the first temple you will get a chance of building loads of defenders, as you will have the cultural lead for at least 2000 years (without any new temples being built)
quote: Originally posted by Arrian
One other thing, I don't know if you all do this too, but my capitol often doesn't build a temple for quite some time. It's too busy building settler, spearman, settler, spearman, etc. Only once I'm done pumping settlers do I build a temple in the capitol. I suspect some other early temple lovers sneak one in earlier.
-Arrian |
Here's one early temple lover alright 
I've experimented with building temples before my first unit, and it simply rocks. Of course, the problem is that you don't have any scouts, and your second city is a bit of a gamble where to place. Other setups have included building one warrior, immediately followed with a temple, a settler, a warrior and again a settler. The capital is undefended until after the second settler is build. I suffered a few defeats where either the Germans or the Aztecs found my capital before my first defender, but other then that I could outREX the AIs on emperor, which is extremely powerful.
Of course, all this when dealing with AIs, not humans, that won't work here (although if we don't find anyone with a scout, it could very well work, and come as a total surprise)
DeepO
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:23. Apolyton Time is 00:23. |
top of page
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|