 |
| |
|
|
Dominae
|
|
Nathan, you're right in pointing out that camps don't often appear close together, so there must be some metric involved there. And yes, it's just a guess that having more camps around decreases their rate of appearance elsewhere. But its not a completely "wild" guess, because in my experience you never get 10-20 encampments on an unexplored island (even a relatively large one). The number of existing camps is most probably a factor, but there may be others.
Theseus, any unit will do. I didn't want to mention Archers because people would have my head for proposing an Archer rush, and Warriors neither because we want to keep those for expoloration. But, we will be building Spearmen and they will mostly be sitting around, so why not make them Elites while they wait? Plus, Elite Spearmen inspire more fear than Elite Archers, I believe.
Edit: Remembering that we're Egypt, it would probably be a good idea to train up our WCs in case we're planning on an early war.
Dominae
|
|
| |
|
|
|
nbarclay
|
 |
Huntsville, Alabama
Dec 1999
time: 23:24
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dominae
Nathan, you're right in pointing out that camps don't often appear close together, so there must be some metric involved there. And yes, it's just a guess that having more camps around decreases their rate of appearance elsewhere. But its not a completely "wild" guess, because in my experience you never get 10-20 encampments on an unexplored island (even a relatively large one). The number of existing camps is most probably a factor, but there may be others. |
Do camps ever show up at all on land masses no civilized nation lives on? I know I've played a game or two where such camps were deliberately planted by the map designer, but I don't think I've ever seen them show up on their own. And on land masses someone lives on, the tendency of players (especially AIs) to exterminate camps tends to keep their numbers down. Also, the fact that camps don't seem to show up too close to each other would tend to keep their numbers under some level of control.
quote:
Theseus, any unit will do. I didn't want to mention Archers because people would have my head for proposing an Archer rush, and Warriors neither because we want to keep those for expoloration. But, we will be building Spearmen and they will mostly be sitting around, so why not make them Elites while they wait? Plus, Elite Spearmen inspire more fear than Elite Archers, I believe.
Edit: Remembering that we're Egypt, it would probably be a good idea to train up our WCs in case we're planning on an early war. |
We probably don't want to build archers at all unless we find ourselves unable to connect horses in a reasonable amount of time. The most likely candidates for traning are probably the early regular warriors and spearmen we build for defense before we have time to get barracks in place (since regulars get promoted more easily than vets).
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dominae
|
|
Nathan: agreed.
Theseus: agreed.
3750BC screenshot available. Yay! More Hills and Mountains to go exploring on.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dominae
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Theseus
I can;t believe I don;t know this offhand: Does killing barbs with a UU trigger a GA? |
Ha! I don't know that either! My intuition is that it works like Leader creation...
Awaiting a response from someone who knows for sure...
Dominae
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Theseus
|
 |
The warmonger formerly known as rpodos. Gathering Storm! Apolyton Spirit!!
Apr 2002
time: 00:24
|
|
1: WCs - Well, regardless we need to speak up about the build queue. As I pointed out in the Turn 6 thread, we are going to learn The Wheel in 20 turns or less, and (I think) we need to get 2-3 WCs out there exploring in the distance, while 2 or so Warriors keep exploring nearby. This will be important especially if we do have a GA problem... we'll want the WCs to ONLY end their turn on bonus defense terrain, and can use the roaming Warriors to explore the holes. In fact, given that WCs are only 20 shields, we may want them to explore in packs of 2, as well, just to be safe.
2: Warriors / Swords - BTW, I'm envisioning reg Warriors as the first build in the next few new towns. Upon discovery of BW, we'll replace what will be somewhere between 4-6 reg Warriors with vet Spearmen, and hopefully have a remaining barb camp to get them promoted to vets. Also, I suggest building 4-6 vet Warriors, so that even if the reg Warriors don;t get promoted before our first war, we'll be able to field a stack of 8-12 Swords, even if some / most are regs. Depending on the environment, we may wish to hold off using WCs in the first war.
3: Gold - The above strategy introduces a need to speak up in the Economic Scholia as well, as we will want 320-480 gold available upon the discovery of Iron Working.
Thoughts?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dominae
|
|
As the Egyptians we can do without ever upgrading a Warrior. Thus, asking the Economic Schola for a bunch of gold may not be necessary, so we need to plan this one in advance. Warrior->Sworsmen, or just WCs? Of course, this depends on if there's any Jungle in our general area.
Dominae
Last edited by Dominae on 10-12-2002 at 07:16
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Arrian
|
 |
Kneel before Grog!
Jul 2001
time: 00:24
|
|
I was just thinking about roads, luxuries, and other civs.
I think it would be a good idea, once we figured out where our nearest neighbor is, to detail 1 worker and 1 military unit (preferably a spearman) to build a road toward their empire. This is not a particularly earth-shattering idea, I know, but I want to discuss a couple of side issues:
1) I said 1 worker. I feel any more will hurt our overall development. Our industrious little fellow will complete a section of road every 3 turns (1 for the move, 2 to build road), which is reasonably fast. A *very* early road connection isn't really all that necessary, since most people will not have cities over size 3 for very long in the early game.
2) Once we have managed a trade connection, we must consider our trade policy. In other words: what we feel is "fair." There are essentially 2 possibilities: a) when trading luxuries for luxuries, we accept only 1-for-1 deals, without consideration for whose empire is bigger; and b) we will accept the idea of taking empire/city size into account and sweeten the pot to get the luxury we want [ex: furs plus 1gpt for wine]
Philosophically, I favor option a, but as is the case trading with the AI in SP, it's all about how much that luxury is worth to you. If we can work out a deal that benifits us by lowering our luxury rate and saving more money than they are asking us to pay, clearly it's in our best interest to do the deal. Then again, I suspect that many human <-> human trade deals will be a mixed bag of luxuries, resources, tech, and money.
3) Such a road is potentially hazardous for us and them: a road that can transport trade caravans can transport an army. We may wish to deliberately slow down construction of the road to run it over a mountain or hill, preferably about halfway between the two empires, and leave our spearman escort up on that good defensive terrain. That would offer us advanced warning of an incoming invasion. At the same time, we may need to somehow convince them that we aren't going to come calling with 20 war chariots.
If our nearest neighbor is GoW, then this road may still be built, but not with trading in mind.
-Arrian
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dominae
|
|
Nice idea about roads. A further consideration: Settlers move faster along roads (like almost any other unit!), so maybe we could expand in the road's direction. This is advantageous because: 1) it brings our empire closer to the other civ's, perhaps denying them land (peacefully), 2) our cities get founded faster (which is always a good thing).
Dominae
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Arrian
|
|
Kneel before Grog!
Jul 2001
time: 00:24
|
|
Dominae,
Clearly any such road should be built with consideration for expansion. If we need to detour slightly to speed a settler toward a source of luxuries, there probably won't be any debate.
Further, such an outlying city could serve the same purpose as my proposed "spearman on a mountain."
However, absent the chance of grabbing more luxury types, it is my opinion that our expansion efforts be directed at quickly building cities on good terrain relatively close to EotS, even if that means building away from other civs. In other words, right now it looks like grassland lies south of us, and we don't know what's north but given the FP along the river there is a decent chance of desert. I think we should build where the good land is (probably south), while hopefully our road worker is going north. This will allow us to get a settler up there quickly. Cities close to EotS will hopefully build their own workers and connect themselves to our road net.
Bah, this is all so theoretical right now.
-Arrian
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dominae
|
|
Uum, 10 Shields and pop point, let's not forget the pop point!
Actually, I'm glad to be proved wrong about Outposts. Useful uses I've heard so far:
1. "Spearmen on a Mountain" stat; with the Spearmen sitting on an Outpost, visibility is 4 tiles in every direction, which is great for...
2. Looking into other civs' borders; keeping track of unit movements in and especially out of a city is certainly good information. This is not usually possible with the 1-tile visibility of cultural borders.
3. Contacting unreachable civs; comms are worth mucho gold (and techs, etc.), so having to wait to build a Galley to contact some civs is money down the drain.
4. Intimidation; the psychological effect of knowing your neighbor is watching your every move must be huge. If we build Outposts, some teams may even ask us to take them down!
Surprisingly, only #1 is exclusive to the early-game (unless you've got Mountains along borders), meaning that the loss of a Worker is not necessarily painful. Gotta try them in SP (when I get the chance).
Dominae
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:24.
Apolyton Time is 00:24. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
08-12-2002 05:55
, Wanted to ask the same question, but was too embarassed to do so 
|