Noble to Prince - unbearable

[iamakka]

idiot
n : a person of subnormal intelligence [syn: imbecile, cretin,
moron, changeling, half-wit, ******]

Can you please stop insulting people rather then refuting their arguments?
I've found much of his thread entertaining, and have picked up some useful strategy advice along the way and would hate for it all to end with you getting yourself kicked out.

[rah]

Hah. All I meant by it was I was going to a level where I feel comfortable at being able to screw around, but still have to take the AI somewhat seriously to avoid a potential loss.

yes, I know what you meant and take it as a compliment because I'm still not comfortable at that level (I get beat on that level more than I win)


And Brandon, take note. Brael is a pro, you are not.

And for the record, go back through this thread and search for the word 'idiot'. You will notice that YOU are the only one that has tossed around this insult. Everyone else has been discussing/questioning your strategies. You claim that some have misunderstood what you've posted. But you've also admitted that your language use is not always that good.

Remember the ole saying. You don't win arguments by calling someone an idiot. It's best if they don't figure that out for a few days. Your mastery of the language isn't good enough for that type of subtlety.

[wodan11]

I've tried one Warlord game so far, and it was fun. However, I'm no "pro" at it, so could one of the experts lay out a sample promotion tree for both melee and mounted units. THANKS!

Okay here's a stab at this. YMMV and all that. I don't claim to know everything but here's what I would do.

Great Wall is an early priority. More so than anything else, probably. If I didn't get GW then I would probably punt and not do the Warlord strategy.

Clearly leader and starting techs can have a huge affect on what you go for at game start. For example, if Genghis I might go for AH right off the bat. That aside, I'd probably go for BW unless I didn't start with Mining. If I didn't start with *either* Myst or Mining, I almost definitely would go Mining; reason there is to prioritize an early military tech but ALSO to give myself a leg up to get Masonry.

I don't know I'd go for Archery but that's always an option. It's a sure thing, of course. Probably not worth even considering if I didn't start with Hunting.

I'd build a couple of warriors or scouts and either try to time a settler for when the military tech (whatever it is) pops, or else do a worker or two and get ready to chop (need forests for the latter of course). Whether going for AH or BW, I want to know exactly where the nearest strategic resource pops so that I can immediately go get it.

Might even be good to found the 2nd city on top of the resource. If not, need to get Wheel if don't already have it.

Okay, military is taken care of. Now, Masonry, without a doubt. Prepare another settler to go get Stone if it's anywhere in sight. Need workers to road also. I'd also prepare a production city with a mine or two, and/or forests to chop, to crank out the GW.

After Masony, things open up. Need to decide whether to go SE or CE, or whatever the flavor of the day is. Terrain will drive that decision for the most part. If SE, clearly need to go for Writing fairly early. If CE, Pottery. Some dynamics exist there because if I went for AH then I can get Writing pretty easily; otherwise CE might be easier/faster. Depends on how bad I want to kick start my research.

Other options exist of course. Oracle, Monotheism, Fishing, Ag all may be attractive.

Beyond that CoL is usually a priority, possibly Philosophy, Calendar, Optics, etc. All depends on normal game decisions.

Anyway just some rambling thoughts.

[wodan11]

Actually, I would think that resorting to name calling is an implicit admission that I have lost ground in the debate and am scrambling to recover. If I have to resort to undermining the other person's credibility rather than simply discussing the merits of the case, then that says something.

[Brael]

I've tried one Warlord game so far, and it was fun. However, I'm no "pro" at it, so could one of the experts lay out a sample promotion tree for both melee and mounted units. THANKS!

It depends on what sort of unit you've got and what you're up against. You're generally up against two types, which vary by the civ or maybe leader. JC for example is a fan of axes/spears in the early game, so I would go combat 1/shock/combats. If your first unit happens to be a warrior, I'm a fan of combat 1/cover/wood 1/2/3/shock/combats. Basically, the promotions are going to vary by what you're up against. If possible try to keep the units to what they're best at so they survive to get higher exp. For archery, go with drill, then combats. Shock is ok too if you're up against melee units.

Keep your archery units away from mounted units if you can, going drill means their promotions are going to be ineffective against things that ignore first strikes.

Anyways, it's pretty situational so the general advice would just be drill/combat, unit type specific, more combat, medic/march. I can see an argument for medic/march earlier though, since it would get the unit more fights and more exp earlier. I don't think it's a big deal if leveling several though.

[Norselord]

if that was meant for me, you do see you too are trying to insult me over the internet right?

as far as your insults and opinions, nobody really cares what you say or your butt buddies except yourselves. trying to degrade and/or belittle someone is childish and you will never change people that way. if you cant respect persons differences and insist on your own conclusions as far as what people think and/or do then maybe you need to work on your people skills, its kinda funny you wouldnt be insulting me in person yet your doing it online

That's the pot calling the kettle black.

Not impressed with your people skills. Although it doesn't surprise me that an insecure person needs to brag and be a hypocrite as it suits him.

If you don't think I would insult you in person, you are mistaken.

[Norselord]

I see you approach RL the same as your civ games...

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzing

[Ming]

brandon,
You seem to be the one missing the point. I've been discussing civ. They are opinions about the game/strategy.
You on the other hand resort to personal insults, non civ related. I haven't said you should grow up, or implied you have no friends, called you personally an idiot, or many of the other insults you have used.

But I will continue to disagree with your flawed strategies... You keep changing what you say when somebody points out how wrong your approach is...

And if your whole defense is that I said noble instead of prince, that's actually pretty funny.
Prince, noble, it doesn't make much difference. Most of the real experienced players play SP at higher levels, which changes significantly how you have to play the game. Many things that you can accomplish at the lower levels can't be done at the higher levels.

And I will repeat that your current game settings are rigged in the favor of the human and a builder. Again, if that's what floats your boat, fine... that's what custom options are for. But that doesn't change the fact that you've made the game much easier for yourself and the style of play you seem to like. Combine that with the level at which you play, and you pretty much insure yourself an easy game.

[Ming]

Okay here's a stab at this. YMMV and all that. I don't claim to know everything but here's what I would do...
Anyway just some rambling thoughts.

That's the part I do get... I was asking about the promotion tree. In what order do you choose the promotions for melee and mounted units. I've now played a couple, but I'm unsure on whether I'm really promoting the units in the right order to maximize the strategy.

Thanks.

[wodan11]

Oops, I read the request for "promotion tree" as "tech tree". Why in the world did I do that... ??? Short on sleep. Anyway it's good info I guess.

[Ming]

Now this was more what I was looking for.

It depends on what sort of unit you've got and what you're up against. You're generally up against two types, which vary by the civ or maybe leader. JC for example is a fan of axes/spears in the early game, so I would go combat 1/shock/combats.

Makes sense... But when you make them great generals, what do you like to add. I kind of like adding leadership first, and then filling in what is still missing. I also like giving the melee units movement so that they can keep up with the mounted units later when I go on the offensive. I also like to add CR3 before the melee units get upraded to Rifleman.

If your first unit happens to be a warrior, I'm a fan of combat 1/cover/wood 1/2/3/shock/combats. Basically, the promotions are going to vary by what you're up against. If possible try to keep the units to what they're best at so they survive to get higher exp. For archery, go with drill, then combats. Shock is ok too if you're up against melee units.

Keep your archery units away from mounted units if you can, going drill means their promotions are going to be ineffective against things that ignore first strikes.

I don't really build archery units much. Unles it is my UU, I don't find them very useful on the offense.
Now granted, hit any stack with some collateral damage units, it doesn't really matter much what you follow it up with. Even warriors can take out units after the stack has been "cannonized"

Anyways, it's pretty situational so the general advice would just be drill/combat, unit type specific, more combat, medic/march. I can see an argument for medic/march earlier though, since it would get the unit more fights and more exp earlier. I don't think it's a big deal if leveling several though.

My first warrior usually gets to woodsman III, and is my early medic.

Thanks for the input. Further comments and discussions from others would be very welcome.

[rah]

I'm going with drill before cr early since I'll be fighting in my own territory early but when an sod shows with mounted units there's an issue. I think there's plenty of time to get the 3 cr before grenadiers. So I'm thinking for melee, leadership, drill one, drill two, the mounted unit one, and combat. While I'd like to avoid shock and cover since later they don't really provide any use later, early survival may make these required. For mounted, flanking and then combat to get down the path for blitz.

I'm open to others suggestions here.

[Brael]

Leadership definately for a warlord promotion, tactics after if you're going for withdrawl promotions.

[rah]

Yeah, it's all about surviving those first 10 combats. If that first war brings a good size sod into your territory, you don't always have the luxury of limiting your GG to 99.9% combats. Yes, I know cats are your friends but if two civs go at you at once, you're hard pressed to keep enough cats avail. And you don't want to use them on single units. That's how I lost one. On a solo horse archer I attacked with a regular spearman first and then with a GG at 97% since he was the only non-injured unit in the city and bang, GG dead. If you can't attack at 97%, your options get really limited early. And no I didn't reload to save him.

[Ming]

In my first game, I lost a few warlords on 95% or better combats. And even lost one later at 99%+.

And yes... the early game is building a lot of disposable cats. It's kind of different than normal games. Normally, once tribs are available, I usually stop building cats or limit it for defensive needs. Here, I just crank out cats until cannons are available.