Great Wall vs. Sun Tzu's

[Ming]

Yes... that is one of bennies of GW. Instant fortresses

Nothing better than having GW... and marching that pikeman/settler combo into enemy territory... and then building on that gold his capital is using. You get a lot of bang for your buck, because they always seem to go all out to knock you out.

[War4ever]

i remember the first game i played with you lads and you did the pike set combo on my special...it was gold IIRC...i was pissed, learned from my mistakes....and got revenge.... the next game...

it was a good learning experience for me....one i am sure you two jokers relish to this day!

[DrSpike]

Originally posted by rah
HAHAHAHAH, Yes I played another quite famous poster. (i won't say the name) and I had snuck a settler/vet pikeman combo into his territory and built in the middle of a river network on a river forrest. When he discovered the city he went all out to destroy it. By the time he had his force ready, I had a placed a second city two off the access river to keep track of what was headed towards the target city. He rushed the city with 4 (i assume vet) knights. and had about 8 more on the river system to attack the next turn. The 4 knights died a horrible death against the pikeman. On my turn, one of my other cities build GW and I sprung the ambush on the rest of his knights lined up on the river. All were destroyed. Within ten seconds, he had disconnected from the game and has never asked to play in another game with me.

Quit a game over loosing some knights. BAH.

RAH

I want to know who this is.

Msg me on icq with the answer later.

[Cruddy]

The banana.

Neither. I like to capture ST before it goes obsolete but barracks are not an expensive build (for the effect they give).

To hand build ST, I would have to sacrifce a vet SOD. OK, if a great leader is available , I'll build it - usually not. My early war efforts are quite pififul by most 'Poly members standards.

GW has only figured in 1 game of mine - I captured it the turn after war had been declared on me and the AI never recovered. An oddity.

Where IS that banana?

[War4ever]

uh we looking at civ2 not civ3 mate

[DrSpike]

Originally posted by War4ever
uh we looking at civ2 not civ3 mate

*chuckles*

Some might say the thread being in Civ2-Strategy was a small clue.

[War4ever]

you never know with some people

[rah]

Isn't this the Democracy game forum

[War4ever]

Originally posted by rah
Isn't this the Democracy game forum

[Straybow]

Nah, we'd be getting a whole lot more +1s

[DrSpike]

No, we'd spend 100 posts deciding whether to start the GW or STWA. Later on of course someone could propose a change of plan, which would require lenghty discussion.

[rah]

Yes, I used to wonder where some people generated so many posts from, until I checked out that forum. It has nothing to do with the game.

[Straybow]

Democracy Games

Advantage: lots of +1s
Disadvantage: reading everybody else's +1s

[rah]

I think most of the +1ers don't read all the other +1ers.

RAH

[lord of the mark]

I used to prefer GW, but as ive improved i find STWA better.

First of all I dont like to build that many cities, and so the expenses to build walls (which last longer than GW, and dont require upkeep) are not much of a problem. I tend to play on the highest barb setting, and im generally good enough at war not to need GW to get peace offerings. Although I havent tried the kind of things like planting a city on enemies gold that have been suggested.

When i played more expansionist on lower levels i certainly like GW.