Civilization 4: Age of Empires 2 TBS edition

[Arrian]

So this all boils down to "spearman vs. tank" again?

Sigh.

-Arrian

[Fidel]

Originally posted by StarLightDeath
The fact that I can even win one time is poor design. Could you imagine rolling in navy seals in Medieval Europe? lol Would be hillarious.

you have to provide 'every time' scenario or admit that your statement was laughable. it is as simple as that.

[Aeson]

Originally posted by StarLightDeath
The fact that I can even win one time is poor design. Could you imagine rolling in navy seals in Medieval Europe? lol Would be hillarious.

You forget the condition you are relying on here, that they will be lead by a commander who orders them to attack in the way they will be most vulnerable.

"We'll go in through the sewers using our scuba gear. They won't expect that. We're going now!"
"Sir! our air tanks aren't prepped. Sir! We'll all drown."
"Are you questioning me soldier?! It's only Muskets in there!"

[StarLightDeath]

Aeson I swear to god you are the text book geek. You just don't seem to be able to see anything beyond the literal writing. I USED NAVY SEALS AS AN EXAMPLE!!! I DID NOT MEAN THAT I COULD STOP A CHOKE OF NAVY SEALS ON REGULAR TERRAIN!! God damn you're ****ing stupid. In the future I will be sure to explain all sarcasm and exaggerations for you idiots that can't see beyond the literal meaning.

[StarLightDeath]

Ok, let me try to explain this for the people here who pride themselves on writing long winded replies and trying to nitpick every little technical detail in an attempt to try to discredit another poster through technicalities and the sheer amount of writing they use to respond.

I used Navy Seals as an example of how ridiculous defense bonuses in cities are. Did I say a musketman is going to kill a Navy seal on regular terrain? No. Did I say I could stop a choke of navy seals? No. Did I not point out that having a navy seal vs Musketman in an MP game is impossible? I most certainly did. My point, for those of you who can't see the forest through the trees, is that it is impossible to take a well defended city. IMPOSSIBLE. It is also impossible to hurt people economically by pillaging the countryside because I will just rape your stack (NOT OF NAVY SEALS AND TANKS BUT OF EQUAL TECHNOLOGY UNITS AESON) with catapults/cannons and triple upgraded units. Why? Because your units don't heal.

The real problem is that when you damage a unit it is no longer that unit anymore. If I take a Navy seal and damage it down to 6 for all intents and purposes it is now a Longbowman. It may still have the unit artwork of a navy seal, but when my axeman attacks it it is a swordsman with navy seal upgrades. In Civ2 even when a unit was damaged it was still that unit. A damaged tank was still a damaged tank. A damaged knight was still a damaged knight. It may have had less hitpoints and thus was weaker, but it was still the same unit. Do you guys understand this or do I need to get super duper technical for certain people out there?

[Aeson]

Something bothering you Eyes?

You were arguing that you would win in that situation. That your reinforcements would be "5 times as fast", thus meaning you need to protect your roads and production. You offered that you would hit the invaders with collateral damage units, ignoring that the invaders could just as well not stack in the situation.

I can see why you don't want to deal with what has actually been said, as you don't have a leg to stand on when it's what is considered. You're making fallacious claims and then when you can't refute the refutations, fall back on name calling.

[Arrian]

The argument, then, boils down to "defense is too strong."

I'd be interested to hear other MPers thoughts on it, being a SP player myself. I know there were avid MPers on the testing crew, such as Fried.

-Arrian

[Arrian]

Doh, DP.

[StarLightDeath]

If they don't stack they are ****ed. Again, you don't play MP aeson so why are you even talking to me? Go back off into geek land and contemplate the complexities of a strength 6 vs strength 5 fight as you try to decipher all the possibilities. Until you play MP and actually know what the hell you are talking about...shut up. Ok? Good. Now run back to playing the AI.

To answer your question, if you break your stack you are just throwing away units because I can attack from multiple cities. In addition, you'd have to use mounted units and we all know how effective mounted units are to spearmen. Will you pillage me? Sure, but will you do so much damage as to overcome the point deficit you will obviously have by trying to take me out through military? No. I'll just use my serfdom workers to rebuild everything in a couple turns and now you won't only not have an army but now I'll have a highly upgraded army from killing all your units.

If you talk to Fried Arrian he will wow you with some combat numbers and tell you all these options...all the while ignoring you while you ask him what he does when the defender has his own stack of units and catapults. His answer to everything is catapults, well catapults work both ways.

[Arrian]

Were you born this arrogant, or did somebody teach you?

-Arrian

[StarLightDeath]

I was born this way. I find it amusing. Then there is the fact that in order to be arrogant you have to overstate your abilities...and I haven't see anyone prove what I'm saying wrong yet. I see a bunch of SP'ers theorizing what would work in an MP game. Nice.

oh, and please don't lose sight of the point I made up there with all the extra baggage being thrown around. The defense numbers are a problem, but fixable. The combat strengths on the other hand are a fundamental flaw and a fatal error. Basically your upgraded units are only technologically superior for the first attack. Then after that they aren't anymore which is why tech superiority is kind of pointless.

[Arrian]

Ok, assuming you aren't exaggerating, technically (who's nitpicky now?) you wouldn't be "arrogant." You'd just be an *******.

If you want to actually make points and have people give a ****, maybe you could make them without all the "baggage" as you put it, hmm?

-Arrian

[StarLightDeath]

Probably. You're right, I am an *******. What's your point? It's the internet and I have a right to be one. Whether you take my information or not is up to you. Nobody is forcing you to read this.

[Arrian]

Indeed. That's one of the few good points you've made!

Boredom coupled with procrastination at work is the answer. But you're right - why read this? Incidently, this being the internet, where people have all sorts of "rights", I have the right to find your *******ry irritating. Pointless of me, I agree, but it is what it is...

Ta.

-Arrian

[Aeson]

If they don't stack they are ****ed.

Lone units aren't in trouble if you are going too heavy on Catapults. Catapults are substandard 1v1 units. So are Longbows. That's what you've offered as your basic defense.

I usually make my long bows strong enough to defend against a nuclear attack and I throw a bunch of catapults in my city.

I showed you what the flaw in that defense mindset is.

Again, you don't play MP aeson so why are you even talking to me? Go back off into geek land and contemplate the complexities of a strength 6 vs strength 5 fight as you try to decipher all the possibilities. Until you play MP and actually know what the hell you are talking about...shut up. Ok? Good. Now run back to playing the AI.

I've played more MP CIV games at this point than you have. It doesn't mean anything though.

Now you are trying to pretend that you never said stuff that's just up the page a bit for everyone to see, and that because I don't play on the ladder that anything I say is meaningless. Even though my arguments are much the same as the ladder players you pretend you would listen to.

To answer your question, if you break your stack you are just throwing away units because I can attack from multiple cities.

With Longbows and Catapults? That's the criteria you were offering. Defensive units with city defender upgrades supported by collateral damage units.

Will you pillage me? Sure, but will you do so much damage as to overcome the point deficit you will obviously have by trying to take me out through military?

The "overcome the point deficit" is not a given. Having an advantage in points does not negate the potential gains of militarily finishing the game. Bragging rights for having eliminated the opponent, and making sure your advantage "now" can't be surpassed "later".

In fact, since military is not something points are awarded for, all else equal (including skill), if you have higher points than your opponent, you have or have had less military than your opponent at some point. It's a tradeoff.

I'll just use my serfdom workers to rebuild everything in a couple turns and now you won't only not have an army but now I'll have a highly upgraded army from killing all your units.

You still haven't offered an explaination as to how a city defender + collateral damage unit mix will drive off a pillaging invader to ever get your land back in your control.

You have the "anti-stack", defender + collateral, but then you assume you have the 1v1 winners too. Of course if you have double the military you will win. But when dealing with reality, you have to make choices. Building a Catapult means not building another unit.

Why? Because your units don't heal.

Medic line of upgrades. March. They won't always be there (though if you don't have any Medic units around, you're really doing something wrong), but you can't say units in enemy territory can't heal.

Not to mention the healing possible due to using promotions, which if you're attacking with Catapults 1v1, will end up being plentiful.