Double Quecha Rush

[Cort Haus]

I tried this on a small inland sea map on Prince, Epic, taking a random Civ which turned out to be the Incas.

I included a worker (possibly two) and barracks, so it wasn't the earliest of attacks on the first neighbour, and even roaded the way there. As I had bronze in my capital radius, a couple of axes were involved in attacking the second AI, so I had three 'capitals' and also held one other captured city as it had fur. I'd not built any settlers.

I then went to consolidate, during which time, of course, the remaining two AIs (Shaka and Kublai) expanded enthusiastically into the void. Both being aggressive, they also built plenty of units. The void also produced plenty of barbs, which have kept my armies very busy (and nicely promoting), while I planted a few cities of my own. Of course, with seven spread-out cities the maintenance was substantial and I had to run four scientists to get to CoL. While doing this, then adding building courthouses, the opposition has been tooling up - particularly Shaka, on one doorstep.

I concentrated my forces against his border, until he, while under OB, strolled past the defended city, en route to either the barb city that I'd been waiting to grow to size two, or to one of my baby cities.

That's where I got so far. My point is that while it is easy to rush and destroy two civs, holding onto this is challenging as I've been strung out with none of the three unit-producing cities able to support each other at that distance, and the opposition able to (thanks to me leaving OB, but I needed the trade) send his stack to where he wants within my disparate empire, with lots of baby cities, while I'm dealing with constant incoming barbarians.

Context : I'm playing this immediately after an OCC conquest game where I had to conquer the same land at least three times because as soon as I finished, someone else would move in. Hence the idea of holding at least the capitals. However, unless the momentum of conquest is constant, and possibly on more than one front, the land will always get filled - but without consolidation and economic focus, it's hard not to slip behind in other ways.

Conclusion. Double-rushing is probably not a great opening gambit.

[Brael]

Or if you do double rush, burn a city. It wipes an opponent out even if you don't get the land.

[wodan11]

Always the problem with early overexpansion. Brael's right... burn a city, or, probably better, don't build all those extra settlers you built. 1 or 2 is all you need.

I think twice, even three times, before I decide to go >5 cities before Currency and CoL.

This has nothing to do with early rushes, other than that you might be able to easily get 4 cities by rushing 2 AIs, in which case it might be good to build no settlers. But that's one of the benefits of rushing. Building settlers costs more than is immediately apparent (because you also have to account for the city not growing and working cottages or whatever).

[Theben]

Just build 2-3 quechuas and park them outside his capital early. Less maintenance and chokes off his growth.

[kittenOFchaos]

So, at Apolyton we've reached discussing the Quecha rush several years after the game has been released.

[Theben]

This is version 11.0

[Ming]

So, at Apolyton we've reached discussing the Quecha rush several years after the game has been released.

Yep... that's one of the advantages of Poly of CFC. Post something like this at CFC, and you would get laughed at or people would talk about how stupid or old the discussion is. But here, people who come late to the game, or try things which are new to them but not new to the rest of us, can post about it, and MOST people will not look down their noses at them and actually discuss it

[Krill]

So, at Apolyton we've reached discussing the Quecha rush several years after the game has been released.

In this instance I see at least 4 tactical points that aren't normally considered.

[Cort Haus]

Or if you do double rush, burn a city. It wipes an opponent out even if you don't get the land.

Sometimes two opponents are better than one, as long as you can take them on separately. Burning a civ which allows another to take their land can just help the latter more than yourself - if they are in a position to take all the land and get very strong.

Burning civs is of course the only option in OCC conquest, where I'd ended up continually re-taking land.

As Theben said, choking is probably best.

[Brael]

Right, but if you're attacking them in the first place, it's to wipe them and/or get yourself the city. If you want them around to keep things balanced between neighboring civs, why would you quecha rush them?

The decision between leaving someone alive to balance out remaining AI's, attacks aimed at slowing a civ down, and completely wiping them out (conquering or burning), really don't start coming into play until you're further in the game and can build more than just warriors (and probably archers for that matter).

[rah]

I'm with Thebs. I'd rush and capture the closest enemy cap, and then choke the next one. If you can keep them from connecting anything all they'll do is build archers. Then once you've got your economy up and running and have filled some the gap you can take that extra cap and take advantage of the nice land that it usually includes.

[wodan11]

Choking is powerful and effective, but I personally find it less than satisfying because it's an exploit.

I'd rather crowd the AI by founding a city on a chokepoint, or extend myself a bit (distance-wise) and found cities on their next expansion spot. Then, keep closed borders. The challenge then is to build up for the inevitable invasion.

Not only is that not an exploit, it's more of a challenge to my skill.

(I just don't find the fun in exploits. It's almost like, why bother with this game. As the game goes along, I find myself "qualifying" my success. It becomes anticlimactic.)

[rah]

I don't do it often so I don't consider it an exploit. I have been know to build a city at the diag of their cap to keep pressure culture wise on their cap. Works best if I'm creative and they're not. Attacking on surprise and being able to get the units on his cap in one turn can be quite effective. For me that's preferred because then I not only get good land out of it, it's totally improved already.

[wodan11]

I don't do it often so I don't consider it an exploit.

(Sorry. Not laughing at you, laughing with you, I hope.)

[rah]

I'll use it in MP games against other Humans but I can probably count how many times I've used it against an AI on one hand. So yes, I never really thought about it as an exploit, so Yes I hope you're laughing with me.