 |
|
Nakar Gabab
|
|
of Pedantic Nitpicking
May 2001 time: 00:23
|
|
F10, and it still works in PTW.
How deeeeeeeeeeeeevious!
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Arrian
|
 |
Kneel before Grog!
Jul 2001 time: 00:23
|
|
quote: It is a gambler's trait in a way (huts, buying workers), but for me it's more about sound planning by having the map information and contacts as early as possible. So often you read about players complaining how they aren't 'in the loop' with regards to the tech race, and it's something that happens at the very beginning of the game, making contacts too late. |
I do think expansionist is a gambler's trait, but with pretty good odds of a payoff if you choose the right map settings. I've played the Iroquois on normal maps enough to know that it ain't worth it on that size map, though.
One thing I thought was interesting was a 1.14 PTW Patch "Fix" that was listed by Firaxis. It's one of the last "fixes" listed... apparently, the AI was able to trade contact before it had writing, and now cannot. That has potentially huge implications for the early contact/tech trading part of the game, whether you are or aren't expansionist.
Overall, I enjoyed this thread, because of the map generation insights and the illustration of the full power of scouts on the right settings. 
Your borg games always amaze me, Aeson. Both because of how powerful you become, and how much patience you must have to play on huge maps and build 100 cities by 10 AD.
-Arrian
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Dominae
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Arrian
I've played the Iroquois on normal maps enough to know that it ain't worth it on that size map, though.
|
I'm my experience, Expansionist is always good in MP, even on the smaller map sizes. I'd be interested to know if someone can give a clear explanation for this seemingly intangible quality. In SP, Expansionist isn't that great simply because the AI knows where the huts are and defends itself quite well early on with all the free units it gets.
Dominae
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Dominae
|
|
Yeah, I think the default should be to assume that people are referring to SP in the Strategy thread (although I know this is the case for you in particular Arrian).
Dominae
|
|
|  |
 |
|
ducki
|
|
I think the hut bonus is one of the more important bits, personally.
Guaranteed - the worst thing you will ever get is a deserted village - never any barbarians, ever.
That combined with the fast scout is great.
The Aztecs are great in their own way, but if you get a bad RNG string you could end up with nothing but barbs from huts, which is nothing like Expansionist, IMO.
On the other hand, as the Aztecs, if you plan to war early, getting a bunch of Jags promoted to Elite before you even start your war can be nice, too.
I never really liked Expansionist until I tried Aeson's build order.
Build City.
Scout x 3 or 4
Granary (maybe Settler or Warrior for unhappies)
Settler (or Granary if Settler above)
This was great and showed me the true strength of Expansionist. If you're not using your scouts(multiple, not just the starting one) very early, you're really missing out.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
GusSmed
|
|
Los Angeles, CA
Nov 2001 time: 05:23
|
|
I just did a little experimenting with this style of play with the Aztecs, and all I can say is: don't.
This opening has no defenders at all in your starting city during the early game. This is OK with Expansionist, because you're not going to produce any Barbarians, and Barbarian Camps don't start appearing until 2000 BC or so. You'll probably be ready or nearly ready to switch to producing military units and settlers by then.
With the Aztecs, not only are the huts not as good, you can produce a trio of Barbarians very early. Since you have no home defenders, if you happen to lose your Jaguar Warrior to the Barbarians (which does happen often at Emperor, and nearly 100% of the time at Deity), if you're anywhere near close to home, you're going to lose production, gold, and maybe your Worker to them.
As another poster pointed out, the Barbarians don't mass-attack your Jaguar Warrior in PTW anymore. Often they go after softer targets.
Real expansionists also pull this opening off better because of the starting scout. At turn 15, an Expansionist has seen over twice as many tiles as the Aztecs. By the time the Aztecs start seriously catching up, the initial mapping is largely done, and the AI players are largely in contact.
- Gus
|
|
|  |
 |
|
ducki
|
|
Gus, the scenario you describe is simply part of every non-expansionist civ.
If you leave your cities undefended, you have to expect them to get sacked or, worse, nabbed by the AI, which has happened to me multiple times with PtW.
The Aztecs do give some of the flavor of Expansionist, but not quite all of the filling.
Don't leave your cities undefended - and with JWs being so cheap, you'd have to pop a hut mighty close to get sacked before a second JW got produced.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
DaveMcW
|
|
I play Aztecs the same as Egyptians, build the UU for less shields then upgrade to a useful unit. It saves the trouble of micromanaging your connected resources.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
GusSmed
|
|
Los Angeles, CA
Nov 2001 time: 05:23
|
|
quote: Originally posted by ducki
Gus, the scenario you describe is simply part of every non-expansionist civ. |
Look, I didn't say "Aztecs suck." And anyone who builds Jaguar Warriors just to upgrade them to Swordsmen is crazy. They're a powerful unit if used correctly.
I just said that Aeson's description of a scouting opening doesn't work well for the Aztecs. He advocates leaving your starting city completely undefended while you pump out scouts and a granary. This just doesn't work for the Aztecs.
The correct thing to do with the Aztecs is to behave as if you're making an Archer rush. Your goal is 4 cities with Barracks with at least 2 decent tiles each doing nothing but pumping out warriors, only you need 10 Jaguar Warriors to attack a city instead of 5 Archers.
You continue to attack, occasionally extorting tech and changing targets, until upkeep become prohibitive. You then switch over to Horsemen, who cost 3 times as much as a JW but are only twice as effective, but cost the same to maintain.
You can expect a relatively unproductive Golden Age, but you're going to be so much stronger than anyone else that you'll quickly have control of your starting landmass.
- Gus
|
|
|  |
 |
|
BRC
|
|
Bump for AU
Here it is Jawa
|
|
|  |
 |
|
VenomLord
|
|
yeah, he's been saying that for ages ELITES UPGRADE TO VETS!! I believe they addded that in to make it harder to generate gl's which seems fair enough 2 me
|
|
|  |
 |
|
ducki
|
|
If you think about it, if Elites upgraded to Elites, even non-Mil civs would have stacks and stacks by the Modern age.
Back on topic, I've tried the "Lots of Scouts First then Granary" thing with Exp. civs and it really does work on Normal and larger maps with Continents or Pangea most of the time. It's a great strat that I never tried before Aeson pointed it out. Now, I can't imagine playing an Expansionist without at least 5 ultra-early scouts. At least.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Theseus

|
 |
The warmonger formerly known as rpodos. Gathering Storm! Apolyton Spirit!!
Apr 2002 time: 00:23
|
|
God, Yahweh (and yes, that's FUNNY), I'm just catchin' up... demogames and all. I ain't gonna go back through 3 months of threads.
I say that Arrian and others have been commenting on a number of your threads, and trust me, you can't go wrong with what you've gotten so far.
I have not, however (I think), seen SAVs and screenshots... they would be very helpful. ducki, for instance, was very diligent about posting AARs and screenshots, and that went a long way to helping us be helpful.
Actually, let me please request screenshots as opposed to SAVs, due to your preference for huge maps.
|
|
|  |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|