There is something seriously wrong with this game...

[Melboz99]

Hey all.

I'm a little PO'ed right now.

I had started a new game on Warlord as the Celts, with a huge map. I go exploring and pretty soon I run into the Iriquois. The problem is, he's right in the middle of the continent and I'm at the bottom.

So, once I get established with about 30 cities I get about 30 archers together and I send them out to 4 cities in groups of about 4 to 6 a peice. Then I try to take all the cities all at once. I lost, badly.

The problem was that it took 3 archers to kill one spearman, and each city had 2. So, I managed to take 2 or three cities after I produce another 20 archers, and make larger groups with them, about 8 archers a group.

I make peace, and take 2 more cities as part of the deal.

Now I realize I have another problem, I have no horses or Iron on my third of the continent. So, I decide I have to deal with this problem then and there.

So, I get together 30 archers, upgrade them to longbowan for 1900 gold, and storm the nearest large city. Then I realize I have another problem, they now have archers, and each of their archers can take out one of my longbowman in one try.

So, I take another two cities, loosing about half of my longbowan to their archers, and I make peace, taking two more cities as part of the agreement.

Finnaly, I get musketman. So I upgrade all of my spearman to musketman with the aide of Leo's and Sun Tzu's and get ready for another battle.

I get together about 30 more longbowan because they were the best attack unit available to me. Even rifleman would have only had an attack of 4. So, I declare war, and I find out something shocking.

Their calvary can take out my Musketman in two tries! They had about 10-15 of the damn things, and I lost 3 cities in the first two turns, as I only had one musketman in each of my border towns. I had thought with a defense of 6, and the defense bonus of having all my border towns above 8 I would be OK, I was completely wrong.

So, taking revenge I decided to take out two of their larger cities. I was shocked that it took 3 longbowman to take on one spearman!

What the hell is wrong with this picture? Two calvary can take out a musketman, but you need three Longbowan to take one spearman???

And why did the Iriquois start out in the middle of the continent to begin with? And why was I left without any resources or luxuries, while the Iriquios had plenty???

I know I probably should have restarted the game when I learned of my situation, but still, this just should not happen.

Dan O.

[Geronimo]

Re: There is something seriously wrong with this game...

Originally posted by Melboz99


I know I probably should have restarted the game when I learned of my situation, but still, this just should not happen.

Dan O.

the really frustrating thing is that you can't know until the very end of the game what your resource situation really is. You can start the game on a huge continent all to yourself and not be able to tell until hours of playing if it has any resources whatsoever. I really hate how it always seems to work out that no matter how large my empire, as soon as I discover a tech that lets me see the locations of a new resource I always discover that I don't have a single tile in all my empire with that resource while tiny little AI island civs have half a dozen of them crowded around their core cities.

[gunkulator]

Re: There is something seriously wrong with this game...

Originally posted by Melboz99

So, once I get established with about 30 cities I get about 30 archers together and I send them out to 4 cities in groups of about 4 to 6 a peice. Then I try to take all the cities all at once. I lost, badly.

First mistake was dividing your forces too thinnly. I usually opt for a single large stack.

Now I realize I have another problem, I have no horses or Iron on my third of the continent. So, I decide I have to deal with this problem then and there.

Had you contacted any other civs with whom you could trade for iron or horses?

So, I get together 30 archers, upgrade them to longbowan for 1900 gold, and storm the nearest large city. Then I realize I have another problem, they now have archers, and each of their archers can take out one of my longbowman in one try.

Why didn't you stack any spearmen in with the longbows? Also, if you have a slow moving stack, you should have a dozen or so catapults or trebuchets to knock the defenders hps down to the red.

And if you have 1900 gold, you almost certainly should have been able to bribe another civ to join you in the war. Divide the AI's forces in half and they are much easier to deal with.

I get together about 30 more longbowan because they were the best attack unit available to me. Even rifleman would have only had an attack of 4.

You should have had cannons at this time. They have a bombard strength of 8. Pretty good against mustkets.

So, I declare war, and I find out something shocking.

Their calvary can take out my Musketman in two tries! They had about 10-15 of the damn things, and I lost 3 cities in the first two turns, as I only had one musketman in each of my border towns. I had thought with a defense of 6, and the defense bonus of having all my border towns above 8 I would be OK, I was completely wrong.

Muskets have a defense of 4. Fortified in a city gives them a strength of 7 plus the terrain bonus. Really not all that shocking that two attack=6 cavalry can beat them. Only having a single defender in border towns is a huge mistake because as you noticed, the AI always attackes en masse.

So, taking revenge I decided to take out two of their larger cities. I was shocked that it took 3 longbowman to take on one spearman!

Sounds like bad luck with the rng. Happens to everyone. You should have brought along some cannons to soften up the defenders.

And why did the Iriquois start out in the middle of the continent to begin with? And why was I left without any resources or luxuries, while the Iriquios had plenty???

Again, bad luck but also some bad planning. It appears like you waited until you had 30 cities before you decided to go get some iron. That's waiting too long and letting the AI build up its defenses.

[Grim Legacy]

I agree with many of the points Gunkulator raised.

While part of the 'problem' may be that the luck of battle is stacked against you in the long run, the player is able to anticipate this and act accordingly. 6-8 single move & outdated (since you had a resource problem) units to take a "large" city is optimistic at best. Aside from bombard units, a few defenders should have been brought in, if only to guard the worn out forces in the newly acquired territories from counterattacks.

Also why were your border towns defended with a single musketman? Did you never see the opponent's cavalry moving about nervously as the CC opponents tend to do?

[Elias]

well first off welcome to civ and the rng. After hearing your story I think you should try to find some mods they are vastly supiror to the real game. I prefer the rise and rule mod if you have conquests.

[Dis]

archer 2, spearman 2. 'nuff said.

[vmxa1]

Melboz99 many of the issues have been addressed already. I would add that having 1900 around means you were not using your time to its best.

IOW you should have made more units instead of gold, bought resources and or alliances.

The Iroq have Mounted Warriors for a UU. This is a powerful ancient unit and I would have wanted to take them out soonest.

Since you have no iron or horses, you should crank out lots of cats and archers. A few spears for defending the stack and rolled.

Then the issue would be, do you want to capture or raze cities. That is a function of how large the empire is that you have to conquer. It will be hard to have enough units to hold hand fulls of cities and you may want to raze some.

The other thing is you do not want to wait until you have 30 cities to take action. do it as soon as you see you are missing Iron or Horses. At Warlord that is pretty early.

Now making peace just because you got a few cities is not a good plan. Your goal had to be to take Iron or Horse tiles and trim them very hard.

This is because if you had 6 cities and one resource from the war, you would still have problems. If they started making MW's you would be in some pain. I would have to beat them down so hard they would no longer be a factor.

Keep those cities making troops the whole time to hold captured cities or your new ones.

[joncnunn]

Originally posted by Dissident
archer 2, spearman 2. 'nuff said.

Defensive bonus:
10% for soft terraign.

25% for fortified

Bring 2+ archers per Spearmen just be on the safe side, all attacks on the same turn to prevent healing of defensive units.

On Calvary attacking Riflemen, yes the bonsus still apply, but Calvary can retreat, which brings the odds back in favor of the Calvary at least surviving.

[Melboz99]

Thanks guys,

Gun,

At first I thought I could just take out their 2 spearman with 4-6 archers, I now agree that wasn't the best plan.

When I went with the longbowman the second time around I did bring two musketman. It was just hard attacking and keeping in one single stack. About 4 or 5 were accidentally left without a defender.

And finnally, I never realized how high the attack was on their calvary, or how low the defense was on my musketman.


You have to realize, that I was well ahead of them in technology, and I was a little overconfident in my technology.

In retrospect I should have waited till I got Rifleman. It was only another 6 turns away. I think I would have stood a better chance with them.



Vxma,

The reason I quit after taking two cites was because I was having bad war weariness, to the point of starvation, and The Iron was on the complete oppsosite side of their empire. I still don't know where their horses were.


My big question is why are there no good attacking infantry in the middle ages? I mean, you get Longbowman with an attack of 4, and then it's not until replaceable parts that you get to upgrade them to Guirillas. That is just too long imo.

Next time I should bring along some cannons, definately. I'm just always worried about them getting seperated from the stack, and getting picked off.

Dan O.

[Melboz99]

Originally posted by Dissident
archer 2, spearman 2. 'nuff said.

Dissedent, that wasn't my problem

I had a group of 12+ Longbowman, + 2 Musketman for defense. In one turn I took on 3 Spearman in a size 7 city.

When the dust settled, I had 4 spearman left, 3 of which were badly wounded.

Dan O.

[Modo44]

After you have the tech for a given resource, press CTRL+SHIFT+m. It will clear the map of clutter, and show you the resources. With CTRL+SHIFT+n you can modify the things that are shown in the alternative mode. For example you can add Roads (to see what's connected, and what isn't), and borders (to see who owns the resource). It helps a lot, since the resources can sometimes be hidden below cities.

As to attacking, consider how many units you need to take that city you want. Then, bring twice as many. Works every time. Almost.

[vmxa1]

Originally posted by Melboz99

Vxma,

The reason I quit after taking two cites was because I was having bad war weariness, to the point of starvation, and The Iron was on the complete oppsosite side of their empire. I still don't know where their horses were.


My big question is why are there no good attacking infantry in the middle ages? I mean, you get Longbowman with an attack of 4, and then it's not until replaceable parts that you get to upgrade them to Guirillas. That is just too long imo.

Next time I should bring along some cannons, definately. I'm just always worried about them getting seperated from the stack, and getting picked off.

Dan O.

If you had WW on Warlord, you need to alter your tactics. Do you have any lux hooked up, if so how many? Do you have markets in the main cities? Do you have any temples in those cities? What about the slider, where is it set at for lux?

There are several great attackers in that age right at the start. MI and Knights, unfortunetly you need iron and horses for them.

LB are quite effective in the open field against non retreating units as a 4 attack is higher than most defenders at that time.

I forget if you mentioned the civ you are playing, but some such as the Vikes have a UU that does not require any resources and at attack 6 will smash those units.

But any time you have no access to two move attackers, build cats and punsih evil doers that irk you. Those 6 archers with 4 spears and 12 cats would take down any town they have.

You would have some elites and may get a leader and then turn out the lights.

WW is handles by having either a short war (less 20 turns). Lux and happy structures as I mentioned. Being in a WW free govenment.

The last would have been my pick after seeing I had no Iron or Horses in sight. I would switch to Monarchy and give no quarter until I had everything I needed.

[Solomwi]

WW is handles by having either a short war (less 20 turns). Lux and happy structures as I mentioned. Being in a WW free govenment.

One clarification here. Since WW is event-based, rather than time-based, a low-engagement war also works. Theoretically, you could stay at war for the entire game with no WW effects, if you never lost any units and picked off all the AI attackers before they could attack you.

[vmxa1]

True, but not important for most players. They have enough to grasp already.

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by vmxa1
True, but not important for most players. They have enough to grasp already.

actually that sounds like a very useful distinction and it certainly not at all obvious just from playing the game. i had been wondering why my first war produced ww so much faster than my second war did. now it makes perfect sense.