Carry on or fold? (Game save attachment inside)

[NFIH]

So I've got another game going and am at a point where I need to decide if I should carry on or fold, based on my position.

It's Noble, Pangea, raging barbs, aggressive AI, tech brokering off (I think), vassal states on, diplomacy win off, normal speed. I'm Attica Blue playing as Hapshetsut and going for a domination win.

From the initial starting position I started off completely surrounded--meaning that even going full bore settlers will only net you three cities, tops. Except for the Great Wall, I built only military units for an early rush against the Byzantines. (I name all my cities using the syntax "City X". If you see a city of mine with a proper name, it was captured. The letters following the names refer to its specialization--M for military, GL for gold, GP for great person and U for utility.)

Anyway, by 1440 I'd just finished taking out the Byz and fighting off the Ottomans (twice) and the Chinese, both of whom tried to backstab me as I was working over the Byz.

Problem is I'm only No. 5 in soldiers (this despite building nothing but military in my first two cities and only some cultural buildings in the captured cities to push out borders), which I don't understand. And I've fallen far down in total points. My research is also behind as the other civs have reached feudalism and built longbows and some maces. I'm only just getting there so another offensive war probably isn't doable right now.

Is there any chance I can make a comeback here? If so, what, exactly, should I do. Or should I just fold?

[snoopy369]

The AI will keep old units around, so don't worry on the soldiers/power numbers. As long as you're reasonably close in mil tech you will be fine; and at the stage in the game you're talking about, it is quite normal to be behind in tech, particularly if you're a warmonger.

Without opening the game (at work), generally I'd say at this point develop your cities as well as possible, and build a lot of military (of course). Try to figure out which AI will be most ripe for the picking, and pick, when the time is right - it might well be a long time. Develop your science in the meanwhile and, after getting currency/code of laws/etc. for teching, go for a military tech down the line (say, military science, or rifling) and then use that temporary advantage in tech from the beeline to capture another AI.

If tech trading is on, you can of course trade your beelined tech as well, once you've clearly won your war...

[NFIH]

I really am stunned that I'm only No. 5 (out of about eight civs) in soldiers though. I figure the only way this could be is that the other civs have more cities than me and are building some units in them. But, with the reasonable assumption that they're also building various buildings and wonders (I know I'm not!), where are they (four of them!) finding the time to build enough units to out-man me given that I'm building nothing but military?

If I wasn't going all military I would have been crushed three times over already. It's disheartening to think I'm in the position I'm in militarily despite my focus because it suggests to me that I really can't win. (No. 5 in power pretty much means automatic attacks from the other civs.)

[Krill]

pictures and 4000BC save file...

[snoopy369]

The AI is always very strong in soldiers. It's because it keeps outdated units and builds a lot of them It's normal to be 'weaker' during the medieval period than the AI; the goal is to stay close enough that you don't get wiped out, and to come out of the renaissance with the tech lead or close to it.

[snoopy369]

The key would be to develop the proper tactical defense. The AI is only vaguely aware of tactics (even in BtS, where it's more so than before, it still doesn't have complex tactical awareness; only the ability to develop counter-units to your units.)

Build a stack of horse archers (then knights ASAP), spearmen (then pikes when you can), crossbows, and catapults. Use the cats first to weaken the stack, then the HA's to kill off their catapults with their retreats and victories (perhaps promote the HAs to have more retreat %), then mop up with crossbows.

As long as you win at a rate of at least 2.5x hammers (you lose 100 hammers to kill 250), even the strongest AI can't beat you; and by the renaisance you'll be fine.

[NFIH]

Originally posted by snoopy369
The key would be to develop the proper tactical defense. The AI is only vaguely aware of tactics (even in BtS, where it's more so than before, it still doesn't have complex tactical awareness; only the ability to develop counter-units to your units.)

Build a stack of horse archers (then knights ASAP), spearmen (then pikes when you can), crossbows, and catapults. Use the cats first to weaken the stack, then the HA's to kill off their catapults with their retreats and victories (perhaps promote the HAs to have more retreat %), then mop up with crossbows.

As long as you win at a rate of at least 2.5x hammers (you lose 100 hammers to kill 250), even the strongest AI can't beat you; and by the renaisance you'll be fine.

Recently, my strategy for home defence has been to build a small force of combined arms very much along the lines you outline, but also with a significant catapult force (a stack of five suicide cats per "region" or front) for weakening the massive stacks the AI initially sends when it DoWs on me. Otherwise, I find that a combined arms force is simply overwhelmed by sheer numbers. Only problem is these cats are only good for the first rush. If the AI has even more troops coming, I'm often in trouble. ...

[snoopy369]

Well, if you have more than 5 catapults, you will be fine (Also, assuming you have multiple fronts, you would just bring the other front's soldiers in; if you are in a two AI war you may be screwed anyway, of course, so that's not that much of a concern.

I prefer to have more like 8 catapults; something like:

5 HAs
3 Spears
5 crossbows
8 catapults

times three or four stacks of that (if I have 3 or 4 fronts), or else a larger stack in the same proportion.

As long as you're careful to have enough cultural border to know several turns in advance of any potential attack force, you are fine - you have the advantage of roads after all to move in faster.

[Colm]

Originally posted by NFIH
I really am stunned that I'm only No. 5 (out of about eight civs) in soldiers though. I figure the only way this could be is that the other civs have more cities than me and are building some units in them. But, with the reasonable assumption that they're also building various buildings and wonders (I know I'm not!), where are they (four of them!) finding the time to build enough units to out-man me given that I'm building nothing but military?

I noticed myself (I have high espionage), that if a civ is at war, it builds ONLY millitary units.

I started a war against the Japanese and every single city they had, changed to military. Some cities of them was building units that took 16 turns to build! It's just a crazy thing to do for a civ to just drop everything and focus on 1 thing.

[rah]

Not really, after one turn of build, I bet the AI will whip to finish that unit that you thought would take 16 turns.
The AI is quite more effective whipping defensive troops in BTS.

If I'm in an MP game, and get declared upon, I'll usually swith every city to units (especially if I wasn't quite prepared) and the second turn I'll whip to completion. I don't see that as crazy at all. I would consider it crazy if I didn't do that.

[NFIH]

Originally posted by snoopy369
Well, if you have more than 5 catapults, you will be fine (Also, assuming you have multiple fronts, you would just bring the other front's soldiers in; if you are in a two AI war you may be screwed anyway, of course, so that's not that much of a concern.

I prefer to have more like 8 catapults; something like:

5 HAs
3 Spears
5 crossbows
8 catapults

times three or four stacks of that (if I have 3 or 4 fronts), or else a larger stack in the same proportion.

As long as you're careful to have enough cultural border to know several turns in advance of any potential attack force, you are fine - you have the advantage of roads after all to move in faster.

How are you balancing that force against having enough units to actually send out to assault an enemy AI? Do you just take one of those defensive stacks and add them to your offensive stack and hope you don't get attacked in the area you've just left relatively defenceless?

In the current game, I've been prepared for the inevitable backstab and have been able to beat back the assaults even without catapults, BUT it did have the effect of causing my victory over the Byz to take much longer (because I had less units with which to attack), which in turn really put me behind the other AIs tech-wise.

[snoopy369]

Well, on the one hand if you're offensively maneuvering you should be able to empty that front's defenders; you should be able to make sure you aren't flanked relatively easily, and the AI is poor at flanking that way anyhow. (Just make sure you keep a constant slow stream of units to the front, rather than making stacks internally and then sending, so long as you still have a surviving stack to reinforce; this gives you the bonus of extra reconnaissance.)

On the other hand, the force I described is not that different from an assault force The only thing you need to add are macemen, and perhaps trebuchets (honestly cats might well be just as good, anyway, but that's a separate point). That sort of force is well balanced to provide the defense to your assault troops from external attacks, and also has some attacking ability - crossbows can make VERY effective assault troops in certain time periods, particularly alongside catapults; even a longbow falls quickly to a crossbow when he's around 4 or less, especially if the longbow is not given Cover and the crossbow is (i'd give at least one or two of them cover, since they're the primary archer defense).

[Krill]

Hmm, Crossbows or swords...CR2 sword is better than a Crossbow IMO unless you are facing a preponderance of axes, and the ones that promote to CR3 can be upgraded to maces later on...

[Seedle]

I took a look and was going to try to do something with it, but then Alexander moved in with a stack of Elephants and Maces. Maybe someone better than me can win this thing, but I would fold. I doubt you are terribly far behind in total number of units (maybe a little, but you have more units than I ever have) but the tech difference is killing you on the power graph (and the demographic soldier count goes up based on both tech-level of units and number of units).
Three things struck me as bad in your game: the great wall, workers, and land.
The Great Wall seems bad because you said you were hemmed in from the start. If you are surrounded by rival civs, there is no where for barbs to spawn, so the wall is pretty useless. Not knocking the Great Wall in general necessarily, but in this game I think it was counter-productive.
You have 3 workers for the second largest empire in the world in 1440 AD. This would be your main problem I think. Alot of your land may be new, so that explains it somewhat, but still, you need more workers.
You can't do much about the quality of your terrain, but this is probably part of the reason you aren't doing well. It isn't god-awful or anything, but it isn't doing you any favors either. For instance, you have cottages in your capital but are using it as a military pump. The cottages aren't a problem, that looks like the best use of your capital's land. But cottages and military pumps don't work well in the same city. But you didn't have much of a choice.

Also, I don't like swordsmen. They are better at killing archers than axemen, but worse at killing opposing axemen and spears. I just don't think they are worth the additional hammer cost.

[snoopy369]

The crossbows are far superior for what I am suggesting (primarily defensive, either stack-defend or city-defend). The fact that they can hold their own on attack is purely incidental