 |
|
jeffds
|
|
Hello,
Was reading some of the interesting threads on the best/easiest Civs to play and was after some further advice.
I have always played in Builder mode with the Egyptians or Babylonians - only going to war when I have discovered Chivalry. So I have never utilised the Civs UU.
Anyway for a change I want to try a few games on a small Pangea map and basically go to war as soon as possible. So which Civ would you recommend based on their UU?
From the threads I have read most people recommend Japan/Iroquois. But I am not sure if these discussions are in the context of large/huge maps. How would they go on a small map.
Thanks for any advice!
|
|
|  |
 |
|
VenomLord
|
|
for very early war the iroquois are very good as are the aztecs or persians... it all depends on HOW early you want the war... pre-resource connection? go the aztecs (they are the only ones that can get one that early besides the babs ) otherwise i suggest either the iroquois or the persians
Last edited by VenomLord on 11-12-2002 at 14:55
|
|
|  |
 |
|
jeffds
|
|
Thanks for the feedback and tips. I am trying out a game with the Iroquois at the moment. Have dropped down to Regent as I don't have a clue about playing in this style. Don't know anything about the ins and outs of Archer rushes etc.
Having a ball though. Got lucky with Horses right near my capitol so have been churing out MWs. Wiped out the Romans - it is a real rush plundering one city after the next - completely different to Builder mode.
I didn't attack straight way though - couldn't break those Builder habits - built up a few cities first. I haven't bothered with Wonders this time. Will concentrate on capturing those.
I have built in the following order - Temple, Granary - if on a river, Barracks, MWs. Is this advised - or should I be going straight for Barracks, and MWs.
Anyway - either way - having fun.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
DaveMcW
|
|
You don't need a granary unless you're losing pop due to settlers or frequent rushing. If you really want a size 12 city you can join workers for less shields than the granary costs. But it's quite difficult to keep a city that big happy.
If you plan on winning in the BC years you don't need temples either.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
jshelr
|
 |
pittsburgh
Apr 2002 time: 00:24
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Arrian
There is also Rome. Their traits are weak, it's true, but you get to play with Legionaries, and on a small map their lack of mobility isn't as painful.
But I'd go with China as the overall best. Archer rush to do some damage, Horseman rush to secure your position, Riders to finish it off.
-Arrian |
So true.
Interestingly, PTW now offers the bargain-basement version of China in the form of the Arabs and their low-cost 3-move "knight." On a small map, you get religion but give up industriousness, which is maybe an ok tradeoff. Religion is a good thing for the warmonger. I'm a China fan myself, but the small map downplays industriousness and tilts 3-move-knight lovers a bit the Arab's way. Also, the scout is particularly nice to have in all-human games that are now starting up.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Zero
|
 |
Bouncing back and forth
Sep 2002 time: 00:24
|
|
I think the aztecs are good at just about any scenario. Them having a early UU and being mil/rel certainly also makes them viable for good early conquest civ.
Among good early conquering UUs, Romans are the only one with militaristic trait. Iroquois is good for the same reason why everyone else is telling you. (3 mounted attack unit and fairly good trait) So are the Persians for their Immortal, but IMO I'd rather take one less attack for iroquois retreat function or Roman's defensive function.
For extremly fast conquest, other than Aztecs, I recommend the Babylonians and the Germans. Germans dont start out with UUs, but they are militaristic and they can produce both archers and spearmen straight off from the start. Babs start out with spearmen which is nice, but thats irrelevant since you should just be building bowmen. You can research iron working straight off the bat and eventually replace bowmen/archer with swordmen and finish off the job for both civ which comes in real handy.
Zulus have mil/exp which is nice and Impis can facilitate horsemen rush by accompanying them. I havent tried this method though so I can't really tell how effective this is.
For PTW,
Celts are great, but their price increase is terrible price to pay. They are just militaristic version of Iroquois with price increase, if your looking for fast conquest game.
If games gonna go little longer,
China, Japan, Arabs are great. I think ansar is bit superior than rider when it comes to fast conquer games. Japan's Samurai is one of my favorite UU. It's a great bargain to build one of them and they are also mil/rel so it helps alot.
I havent tested keshik's ability fully enough yet.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:24. Apolyton Time is 00:24. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|