Announcement

**notyoueither** · November 12, 2002, 23:08

There seems to be a general consensus that Industrious and Expantionist are the choicest traits.

After them come Religious and Militaristic.

The UU is also important. Since we will likely engage another human civ in the Ancient era, a good, ancient, offensive UU is important. So that gives us...

--- the A team. 2 of our desired traits AND great UUs.

- Celts. Mil & Rel. Wow. the Gallic Swordsman is a real brute. A two move swordsman! However, it costs 10 shields shy of a knight. A very high cost indeed for a unit that will not upgrade usefully beyond the early Medeival.

- Iroquois. Exp & Rel. An excellent ancient UU. one of the best, especially when you consider the frequency of retreating from slower units instead of losing the unit.

--- and the B team. 2 of our sought after traits, but weaker UUs

- Aztecs. Mil & Rel. The Jag is a fearsome sight for your opponent to behold on turn 3 or 4 of the game. However, it rapidly losses it's fear factor as the civs discover first Bronze working and then Iron working. Also prone to a too early GA.

- Egypt. Ind & Rel. The War Chariot is not among the powerhouse ancient UUs, but it is fast and they can build horsemen as well, so they can avoid the too early GA in many cases.

- Zululand. Exp & Mil. A 'weak' UU, but cheap and fast. Many of the best players like this civ a great deal. Expert at resource denial and wrecking economic havoc. Unfortunately the chance of a too early GA is great.

--- finally, the C team. Only one of the 4 traits, but strong UU.

Persia. Ind & Sci. The Immortal is one of the most renowned of the Ancient UUs. Thinking of the effect on our opponents' morale when they see a stack coming for them should not be forgotten.

Rome. Mil & Com. The Legionaries. What do I need to say? These are the most well balanced of the powerful units until the Medeival era. Useless to compare vs Immortal at this point since we will not face Persia in the hands of humans. Nonetheless, the Legions ability to take AND hold ground is unequalled in the Ancient Age.

**notyoueither** · November 12, 2002, 23:32

I have played around with the map generator. I am no longer too concerned with the map we get with Wet. Yes, with wet there was at least one start position near sizable jungles, but I do not think we should limit our choices to that 1 in 8 start.

I am fully prepared to ditch Egypt now.

Aztecs and Zulu? Too early GA. We would not need it against an AI civ, and if we go after a human civ with such units we risk bogging in a war of attrition that would be lethal to the long term prospects of both combatants. Do you want to take on Num Mercs with Impi? There is no retreat for either against attacking War Chariots.

Persia and Rome. I would say no to Rome. Unfortunately for a Pan or Cont map she has neither of the 2 choicest traits. Although, that combination could be lethal on an Archi Map. Persia would be harder to pass on with the Ind trait, but Sci in MP is definitely one of the least regarded traits.

That brings us to the Celts. I say no. Our economy will not be up to building knights at the time we will want to deal with a neighbour. It is hard to pass on that 3/2/2, but alas there would be too few of them.

Iroquois. They remain. The Mounted Warrior is an excellent offensive tool. That and the Expantionist trait on Pan or Cont. Nuff said in my book. Given the map we will face, the Iroquois would be my choice.

I am farily sure that Sir Ralph is going to have some ideas of his own. So please give him a chance to present his thoughts before we jump all over anything I have said.

Who knows, maybe Vel will put in an appearance.

**Meshelic** · November 13, 2002, 06:43

The first civilization I played as on PTW were the Celts, and was very impressed with the Celtic Swordsman... the downside to them is their high cost in shields, and the fact that they don't upgade to anything higher. However the bonuses I saw in them far outweigh the down, I believe.

Despite their heavy cost, they generally survived alot longer than most units (especially with the ability to withdraw from battle) and always put in a devastating attack even in small numbers. Their movement allows us a VERY mobile army. Their upgradeability doesn't matter TOO much in my opinion because their usefulness is lessened ONLY with the onset of Chivalry, which allows us to build knights who are more powerful anyways.
So to have a swordsman that is undoubtedly one of the strongest units of the ancient era, can move 2 spaces at a time, AND be able to withdraw from battle (more chances for repeat battles and promotion)....this would be fantastic....

The Iroquois are a very good civ to play on this level as well. Expansionist is very helpful in finding where our opponents are and making sure we always have the best maps for sale ($$$).
Not to mention the Mounted Warrior is a very good early combat unit that also has some of the traits that I like in the Celtic Swordsman.

So I would strongly suggest we play as one of those two civz, either the Iroquois or the Celts.... thanks.

**Meshelic** · November 13, 2002, 06:48

Remember that we should also weigh into account what civs the other teams are playing as well. No doubt they will exploit every advantage they realize to, as undoubtedly we will be as well. We should also consider how we want to be looked at as a threat from them, how they view us. Their opinion of us and our potential may weigh to our advantage some way...

...discuss amongst yourselves....

**notyoueither** · November 13, 2002, 06:59

That's the thing. They all seem oblivious to the Expantionist trait. No fear there.

One will take Carthage. Another.. the Ottomans??? What is the third settling for?

**Harovan** · November 13, 2002, 07:10

My first choice are the Iroquois, for the reasons NYE mentioned. No further analysis needed.

Second choices are Persia and the Celts.

Persia - Scientific may suck in MP, but I think techs have a higher value than in SP, since tech trading among the human players will be heavily reduced (compared to the SP tech whoring). And the AI's will be gone till the end of the Ancient age, I guess. So the 3 free techs are a nice to have, and halfprice libraries, universities and research labs (? about these) are also a good thing. Industrious is very powerful, no doubt on that. And the UU kicks butt without being overpriced.

Celts - Didn't the Gallic Swordsman cost 50 and a Knight 70? That would be 20 shields shy. Maybe I just don't remember (at work right now). Overall rel/mil is an awesome combo for a warmonger (we aren't Legoland, are we?). Increased happiness due to cheaply rushed temples, the ability to switch to Monarchy or Communism instantly if it's needed, and then back to a wealthier gov't again and fast unit promotions are a real asset. And let me say: The Gallic Swordsman rules. It's almost unstoppable, a conglomerate of a Swordsman and a Mounted Warrior. It may have a high price, but it's worth it. Mix in some cheap Spearmen to make them maneuver securely (the spears take the counterattacks) and go kick some butt, human or AI doesn't matter.

Btw Meshelic: I guess map trading is a big

**notyoueither** · November 13, 2002, 07:23

re shield costs. My bad. I glanced at either the Mongul or the Arab (-10 shield Knight UU). That puts them midway between an Immortal/MWarrior and a knight.

Second the prohibition on Map trading. I'd rather die than give up our map. It would cost less in the end.

re the Gauls. I am mightily tempted to agree, but Mil/Rel are the 2 second tier traits. All of the play testers love Exp. Give them nothing else, but give them Exp and they are happy. I am not convinced that the book has been written, but 3 or 4 free techs, 1 or 2 free cities/settlers... plus the knowledge of the map... it's a mighty big leg up. Unless we're on a 20 tile island.

**Meshelic** · November 13, 2002, 07:39

Oops on the map trading mention , I must have been caught up in my thoughts late-night trying to think of a reason to vote Iroquois over Celts...

So that's one more reason to vote Celts over Iroquois in my book.

**Randolph** · November 13, 2002, 08:24

Ahhh….. private forum.

I don’t think that we should rule out the Americans. I agree about the value of expansionistic, but to have that and industrious? Yeah, they essentially have no UU, but the benefits of the industrious trait (extra improvements and/or excess shields and city growth from not having to put so many resources into workers) could easily allow for the extra units necessary to make up for lack of individual unit quality.

But that aside I in no way oppose the Iroquois, Good traits, great UU. If that’s what the consensus is I fully support it.

**asleepathewheel** · November 13, 2002, 16:01

I love the Iroquois.

Don't have much to add, just wanted to say that.

**Meshelic** · November 13, 2002, 16:04

It seems that since those same 8 people carried the name, logo and government discussions then those same 8 people will have to carry the civ choice as well. Where are the rest of the members we were supposed to have? I guess I thought wrong when I thought that we had as many ppl as Trip's Team or the Warmongers...we're missing 5 people aren't we??

**Randolph** · November 13, 2002, 16:19

Members
alva848

asleepathewheel

chamonix
Conqueror
FrustratedPoet

Meshelic

notyoueither

Nuclear Master
OPD (said he wouldn’t be around much)
Randolph

Sir Ralph

Velociryx
zeit

Missing:
chamonix
Conqueror
Nuclear Master
OPD (said he wouldn’t be around much)
Velociryx

Does anyone know these people? (besides OPD obviously)

**Meshelic** · November 13, 2002, 16:44

I know none of them.

I don't want to seem eager to begone with members that have signed up, but if they are not going to participate then we should at least post a note to them in the other forum that they need to contact us to let us know if they're in or not....

With the eight members we have, that is not enough to fill our schola requirements, and probably not enough to sufficiently run our government and game. We will probably need more members....

**alva** · November 13, 2002, 16:49

Randolph,

Vel will be around, and usefull.

He's knowledge of this game is

don't know the others, i'm affraid. But this was expected IMO.
We could still do some active member-hunting

.
I know of at least one more candle'breer, I would be very happy to have on the team

Announcement

Civ Choice

Civ Choice

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment