I Hate Existence

[Arrian]

The ones that irritate me the most, I think, are the ~96+ % odds battles I've lost with Warlord units. That's happened to me two or three times. It's entirely fair, mind you, but irritating nonetheless, 'cause then I have to go and blow another GG as a warlord to get enough promotions on a unit to enable West Point...

-Arrian

[Jaybe]

I thought I had found that your XP-qualifying unit no longer has to survive to be able to build West Point/Heroic Epic.

Just in my last marathon game I lost TWO warlord units to 93+% battles. One was a 99% (gunship's second warlord battle, promoted for blitz). That "blitz" really fizzled!
Turned out I didn't even need that war for the win -- just had to wait for more recently-captured cities to expand their borders.

[Willem]

Originally posted by Jaybe
I thought I had found that your XP-qualifying unit no longer has to survive to be able to build West Point/Heroic Epic.

That's right. All you need to do is create one level six unit to be eligible for West Point, it doesn't matter if he's still around when it comes time to build it. I personaly don't bother with Warlords, I just create the first one for the West Point ability, then turn all the rest into either military advisors or academies. Chances are the warlord isn't going to survive very long anyway, so it seems like a waste of a Great General. I've lost warlords on the very first attack, but an advisor/academy will be around for the entire game.

[Jaybe]

I'll use 2 or 3 GGs for academies/advisors, but using the GG as a Warlord is so much more fun!

[Dis]

swordsmen can't defeate longbowmen. case closed.

[Dis]

I have a theory about the odds and random numbers. I felt it was this way in civ3 as well.

When you are better prepared and have more numbers, the numbers seem to go your way. When you are trying to take a city with insuffcient numbers and are hopen the numbers will go your way, they never do.

more troops=better chance at winning.

[Alexander I]

Originally posted by Dis
I have a theory about the odds and random numbers. I felt it was this way in civ3 as well.

When you are better prepared and have more numbers, the numbers seem to go your way. When you are trying to take a city with insuffcient numbers and are hopen the numbers will go your way, they never do.

more troops=better chance at winning.

Except when you have everything riding on your victory. If you need your huge army for another campaign on a 2nd enemy, they'll all be slaughtered before the walls of your 1st enemy's weakest city.

I kid you not, I've lost fights where I've already reduced the defenses to 0 and the chance of my success is 99%!

[Dis]

that's part of my theory. When you need to win the most, you don't. when you have more than enough troops and it doesn't matter if you win or not, you always win.

[Alexander I]

Originally posted by Dis
that's part of my theory. When you need to win the most, you don't. when you have more than enough troops and it doesn't matter if you win or not, you always win.

I guess I see your point. It seems to me that I only lose when I care about winning.

[CarnalCanaan]

These are the posts that keep the State of Nevada solvent. We thank you.

[Alexander I]

Originally posted by CarnalCanaan
These are the posts that keep the State of Nevada solvent. We thank you.

True that.

[Arrian]

Originally posted by Jaybe
I thought I had found that your XP-qualifying unit no longer has to survive to be able to build West Point/Heroic Epic.

Just in my last marathon game I lost TWO warlord units to 93+% battles. One was a 99% (gunship's second warlord battle, promoted for blitz). That "blitz" really fizzled!
Turned out I didn't even need that war for the win -- just had to wait for more recently-captured cities to expand their borders.

Really? I just assumed... silly me.

-Arrian

[Jaybe]

Originally posted by Arrian
Really? I just assumed... silly me.

Another legacy belief from Civ3 bites the dust.

[Dis]

I could have swore I read that he has to survive. I sometimes keep him behind the front lines to "protect" him. I usually only use him for mop up duty.

[ZEE]

if i was more aggressive i wouldnt worry at all about this crap... since im usually ALWAYS undermanned and i lose battles i understand where bleeka is coming from... screw it, im just going to wipe out everyone