What's so great about bribing cheap barb units?

[debeest]

Lots of people are very enthusiastic about bribing barb units (just for the purpose of getting "cheap" units, as opposed to defensive or other reasons). Why? A bribed barb unit is somewhat cheaper than a unit you rush-build for yourself, but it still costs slightly over two gold per shield, which is the exchange rate when buying improvements. That's not especially "cheap." How big an advantage is it?

Since the exchange rate for rush-building improvements is better than the rate for rushing units, that's where I generally spend my money; I build units naturally, with shields. Obviously there are times when it makes sense to buy units, but am I making a big mistake in allocating my money mostly where I get the best rate? (I realize that at a certain point a rush-built caravan/freight will immediately more than repay its cost, but I'm talking about the early to mid game where money is tight.)

[TCO]

opportunity cost, son...

I play an agressive style. I rarely want any buildings. But I do want soldiers for the onslaught.

[atawa]

And to get NON units when in Rep or Demo

[Goingonit]

Barb units don't take any of your cities' time to bribe, as opposed to if you rush-build.

[-Jrabbit]

I'm far from an expert, but what I like about this approach is that you can maintain a cheaper city defense by using diplomats with 1-2 phalanx/pikes, especially in the early-mid game when you're busy expanding. No support cost and no rushbuilding defenders. Just bribe a barb attack unit and use it to chop down the incursion while your city remains stable. Instantly in battle, the unit is often a vet, and you get a LOT more leader kills this way. When you consider that, it's more like a break-even or slightly profitable approach over the course of a game.

After each attack, I send the new unit to where it's most needed and re-home (unless it's NON), again expediting expansion. Since adopting this approach, barbs have become almost welcome.

[Marquis de Sodaq]

They come with gold. A horseman will cost you 41 gold, but then you take the king that same turn and get 150 gold. Net cost +109 gold and one horseman. Or +68 gold and two horsemen. Not a bad deal, if you ask me. As an added bonus, you still have your diplomat, as well.

Milking a spawn area can fund a lot of projects in your empire. Kill/bribe barbarian, capture leader. Repeat ad nauseum.

[rah]

Yes, it works better with horsemen or other 2x movement types since the king is more likely to get seperated from his protection. With archers, they don't get seperated. So when that archer comes up next to your city you either have to bribe the one that isn't doubled up to attack the other one/with king (and you don't get the king) or hope it dashes itself against your defender.

[atawa]

Yup, free money and units almost better then demanding tribute from AI

[debeest]

Certainly, if you can catch a barb leader, that makes it more than worthwhile. And if you can get NON units at barb prices, that's a good deal. But I'm talking about the people who get excited because there's a barb city nearby, and they loiter near it with a dip, bribing each unit as it comes out, just to buy cheap units. It just doesn't seem like that big a deal; they're not all that cheap.

[TCO]

Did you understand my response regarding opportunity cost?

[Marquis de Sodaq]

Originally posted by rah
Yes, it works better with horsemen or other 2x movement types since the king is more likely to get seperated from his protection. With archers, they don't get seperated. So when that archer comes up next to your city you either have to bribe the one that isn't doubled up to attack the other one/with king (and you don't get the king) or hope it dashes itself against your defender.

When next to a city, a barbarian always attacks the city. You can move a warrior behind a barbarian legion, he is safe. then grab the leader after the legion dies.

[Mercatia]

The only time I bribe barbs is when they have captured a city (typically once a foriegn city).... I then use them to capture the city and make it my own.

This can be done without penalty of causing war and is a great way to sometimes split a foriegn country.

[Six Thousand Year Old Man]

Originally posted by Marquis de Sodaq

When next to a city, a barbarian always attacks the city. You can move a warrior behind a barbarian legion, he is safe. then grab the leader after the legion dies.

I never knew this... have you tested this, M. de Marquis?

If that is always the case, then it is a very, very useful bit of information. I don't remember it in the barbarian papers either

[debeest]

GP, I know what opportunity cost means. But not everyone is completely building-averse. Did you understand my posts? I'm not saying it's not worth bribing the barbs; it is cheaper than rush-building. I'm just saying, I don't see why people get all excited about it and go to some lengths to create the situation, when it doesn't save all that much.

When I'm building units to pursue a war, I want vets, and barbs are rarely that. Why buy weak units a little cheap when you can build or buy strong ones?

[Scouse Gits]

debeest ... I agree. Unsupported units are nice when they fall into your lap...but I wouldn't even think about elaborate schemes to procure them as there are too many other important things to concentrate on.

----------------

SG(2)