warriors or phalanx?

[Andemagne]

yesterday i read the civ2-successor game thread
in civ2general forum and it got me thinking.

in the beginning of the game, if you do have
bronze working, should you build warriors or
phalanx?

i allways build two phalanxes in the beginning or
phalanx-settlers-phalanx.

so what do you think? (or how do you play?)

------------------
"Victrix Fortunae Virtus"

[Smash]

Warriors.Cheap and FASTER.Phalanx or pikes later.

Something like:warrior,warrior,settler,settler,phalanx,horse or pike.

With Horseback it may be something like

warrior,horseman,settler,horseman or phalanx,settler

Huts are still the best for a good start.Playing with no huts is a big difference.

[Mercantile]

Warriors and then dips without the dips, you risk losing cities quickly, especially if the barbs come knocking ala raging hordes, which IMO is the only way to play.

[DaveV]

Mercantile - the flaw with diplos as defense is that the barbs have a nasty habit of stacking. I like to have a few attacking units around for emergencies, but I like to use some diplos, too.

Oh, and to answer the orginal question: warriors.
[This message has been edited by DaveV (edited October 16, 2000).]

[Scouse Gits]

Warrior, Settler, Settler - then think


------------------
____________
Scouse Git[1]

"CARTAGO DELENDA EST" - Cato the Censor
"The Great Library must be built!"

[Bohlen]

Warriors are the cheapest may to maintain martial law in the early game, which in turn helps you expand immediately. Warriors do a fine job when defending a city placed on a riverbed. If you have the choice of either unit and are concerned with the safety of an outlying city that is built on grassland or plains, build a phalanx. Otherwise, warriors are the way to go. If you build Leo's later, you won't regret it.

[kcbob]

It depends.

Usually I go warrior, settler, warrior. But if I see an imminent danger, i.e., barbarian or known hostile AI, I might opt for a phalanx as the second defender. Actually, I might even change horses in midstream and switch the first warrior to a phalanx.

But for the most part, a couple of warriors is sufficient.

------------------
Frodo lives!

Better dead than "Red"... or green... or blue... or yellow... or orange... or purple... or white.

[Shogun Gunner]

quote: Originally posted by kcbob on 10-16-2000 09:23 AM It depends. Usually I go warrior, settler, warrior. But if I see an imminent danger, i.e., barbarian or known hostile AI, I might opt for a phalanx as the second defender. Actually, I might even change horses in midstream and switch the first warrior to a phalanx. But for the most part, a couple of warriors is sufficient.

Do you mean that literally? A city on a river, changing warrior production to horseman product would be "Changing horses mid-stream!"

[kcbob]

quote: <font size=1>Originally posted by Shogun Gunner on 10-16-2000 11:27 AM</font> Do you mean that literally? A city on a river, changing warrior production to horseman product would be "Changing horses mid-stream!"

LOL!

------------------
Frodo lives!

Better dead than "Red"... or green... or blue... or yellow... or orange... or purple... or white.

[This message has been edited by kcbob (edited October 16, 2000).]

[DaveV]

Mercantile - and, if worse comes to worst, you can usually bribe the city back for a mere pittance.

[ColdWizard]

I usually play multiplayer on 2x2x settings, so i usually build warriors for quick and early exploration, for huts and to spot good city sites. i'll usually only build phalanxes if there is an overwhelming defensive need.
[This message has been edited by ColdWizard (edited October 17, 2000).]

[Spider]

I agree with Mercantile. When it comes to the AI or barbs, I'd much rather have a diplomat than either a horseman or a phalanx. It's been my experience that barbarians rarely stack (other than the leader) and having a diplomat affords you the best opportunity of nabbing that 150 bucks.

I almost always choose writing as my "off path" tech on my way to Monarchy, and I end up building warriors and diplomats, rather than horsemen and phalanx, in the beginning of the game.

The scourge of the early years is the infamous Barbarian Archer. They usually come in twos, accompanied by their leader.

With their attack bonus of 50% on deity level, the phalanx isn't going to hold up against two archers in most situations; even a couple phalanx are going to be hard pressed to withstand that assault.

Mix and match horses and phalanx against two barb archers; whatever combination you choose you're likely to end up on the short end of the stick. Two horses won't get you out of the jam very often, nor will a horse and a phalanx.

Now, give me a warrior and diplomat, and I can almost guarantee you that I'll have the opportunity to bribe one of those suckers along the way. You can always see them coming from a distance; just get that diplo out there and wait for the opportunity - bribe one, kill the other. Usually, the leader will misstep somewhere along the way and find himself NAKED IN THE WOODS; try waiting for that opportunity, bribe one of his buddies (or both if you are rich) and grab that 150 bucks (Don't ask where he's hiding it). As long as you get that 150 bucks you don't care what the other archer does.

This scenario plays itself out numerous times every game, if not with archers, with something else. I never feel comfortable until I've made my first diplomat.

[Tizzy]

I had always thought of warriors as pretty useless, until I started playing OCC. Now I don't build phalanxes at all, warriors to start, then upgrade to Pikemen when they come along.

Tiz

[Mercantile]

Dave....

I agree that barbs do have this nasty habit, but usually the first couple or rounds of these redheads, one of the two coming is by himself if not, then i dont' learn well and....... another lost city, with my military advisor, smashing his drink in disgust

------------------
Do you shovel snow in your birkenstocks?

[Mercantile]

Dave... you are correct. I just hate losing the pop point. In the early stages, that has thrown my building of a settler off by a landside, to the point that i disbanded the city However, bribing the city costs next to nothing, so its not a bad strat, espeicially if the city is size one.

Spider... i so agree. If those achers come anywhere other than your Capital, then you are surely screwed. Archers as it is well documented here at Apolyton, seem to be crappy on defense and POWERFULL in the early offense. Besides, you can't attack with Phalanxs. Although taking writing or horseback riding, disallows the wonder capability, i think everyone forgets that writing allows easier incremental buying which is what early expansion is all about.


Darn, i just had a news flash Warrior Code, a scourge at best, unless you have already discovered monarchy allows this as well , so at least there is some comfort for finding this scroll of wisdom in that first hut.

------------------
Do you shovel snow in your birkenstocks?