No, we don't want the Iroquois!

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by Velociryx

Don't get me wrong tho....if we opt for the Iroquois, I'll be cool with it, but I think we could do better. Does anybody know what map settings we'll be using? The answer to that question would cinch it in my head. If we're using a huge, pangea map, let's rock Iroquois style....if we don't know...it's dicey.

I believe its a standard sized map with all else random.

[Harovan]

For some reason, the MP'ers report, that expansionist is a very strong trait in MP (unless on Archipelago, that is).

It's probably the gamble about the early settler and the tech advances it can give us. The values of techs is vastly increased in MP, because tech whoring like in SP will hardly happen. Each ancient tech, especially the early ones is worth about 20-40 turns.

Also, the scout is a good and fast spy, who can cross an enemy border, look around and get out without the enemy takes notice. And luxuries and resources will be early reported.

A good start is the make or break in MP. And expansionist can grant it.

[FrustratedPoet]

Originally posted by Arrian
I considered China and Japan, and could easily be talked into them

I think that the advantages of a good Ancient UU are so great in this game (we need to hit at least one human Civ very hard early on) that waiting until Knights to get our best unit might be waiting a little too long.

I could be talked into China or Japan too, however, they're excellent.

[Harovan]

Vel, btw, I proposed the Germans to NYE too, in a PM, as a possible alternative. I'm a proponent of archer rushes and they are by far the best for this.

But they have an UU that comes too late for MP and they're not guaranteed to have a GA, like civs with early attacking UUs.

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by Sir Ralph
For some reason, the MP'ers report, that expansionist is a very strong trait in MP (unless on Archipelago, that is).

It's probably the gamble about the early settler and the tech advances it can give us. The values of techs is vastly increased in MP, because tech whoring like in SP will hardly happen. Each ancient tech, especially the early ones is worth about 20-40 turns.

Also, the scout is a good and fast spy, who can cross an enemy border, look around and get out without the enemy takes notice. And luxuries and resources will be early reported.

A good start is the make or break in MP. And expansionist can grant it.

In the few MP games I've played,the Iroq's have been very strong. Granted the were played by me The fast start is huge, the knowledge of landscape. the unit. all very strong mp.

[Harovan]

Originally posted by FrustratedPoet
(we need to hit at least one human Civ very hard early on)

I think we should go for the AIs first. They are the easiest prey. If we won't take a big slice if this pie, the other human teams will, which is bad.

[FrustratedPoet]

well, you could be right. Of course, we might not have a choice. With 5 human and 3 AI then we might be boxed in by a couple of human civs.

Important general point (I know it's also obvious, but people like me need reminding so I'll post it before I forget):
We can't have a 'quick' war against a human Civ. They will not make peace and give us loads of techs like an AI would. If we start a war we must be prepared to finish it. There will be no oscillating war against the humans.

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by FrustratedPoet
well, you could be right. Of course, we might not have a choice. With 5 human and 3 AI then we might be boxed in by a couple of human civs.

Important general point (I know it's also obvious, but people like me need reminding so I'll post it before I forget):
We can't have a 'quick' war against a human Civ. They will not make peace and give us loads of techs like an AI would. If we start a war we must be prepared to finish it. There will be no oscillating war against the humans.

Thats a very good point to keep in mind.

Have to strike and strike definitively.

Making Religious even more important to switch govs to avoid the WW.

[Harovan]

True, FP, and another reason to go vs the AIs first.

We have to grow very fast very big. IMHO, that's the key for our victory. Helpers are attacking the AIs early and ... being expansionists.

[Theseus]

Interesting thoughts.

Going into this, I'll tell you what scares me most: random settings. Think of all the bad cards we could get dealt... We need the most *flexible* civ, and to me that says Egypt.

The problem though, is that we ALSO need to have a first-level military tech, just in case!! And that means militaristic.

And if we have to give up religious or industrial, well it's buh-bye to the priests.

China.

[Meshelic]

I agree with the possibility of being the Chinese. But fear that their UU (Rider) may come in too late for us to use, because by that time there will most certainly be a war between at least ONE of the other human teams (whether with us or someone else).

The Japanese are very good too, and we would be virtually guaranteed a frequent line of Great Leaders...

Persia is great as well.

We need to decide soon, we have two weeks until game time.

[Velociryx]

I thought about this exclusively on the way home tonight, and here's the conclusion I reached.

Before we can settle on a civ, we MUST determine what traits "work best" with our assembled group.

If we're a bunch of warmongers, and we pick traits that do not play to that ability, then we work against ourselves.

Likewise, if we're a bunch of peaceniks, then the Militaristic ability will help us not at all.

Based on my reading here, and drawing conclusions FROM those readings, I think we can safely narrow the field to include any of the following civ traits, and prolly be okay:

Religious
Industrious
Militaristic
Expansionistic
*I have seen ZERO evidence in support of commercial in my reading here!

UU's are a bonus, but should not drive our thinking. For example, the Aztec give us a FINE, strong option....Militaristic AND Religious, plus the major benefits of the Expansionistic trait.

We can, by and large, control our GA, by deciding NOT to attack with our Jags, and simply using them to fulfill the same roles as scouts. They come with the added benefit of being "foot cavalry" (move them into position, build a --cheap!--barracks, and mass upgrade to sword once they're were we need them to be.

Very strong.

OTOH, as has been mentioned, the Iroquois DO have some attractive features. The MW is perhaps the most punishing UU in the ancient age, and mobility WILL win wars for us in MP, more often than brute force and massed slow movers.

Egypt has vast, superb peacetime flexibility, and is well suited to warring....also, the chariot ---> horsemen upgrade, sparing us from blowing our GA until we WANT it.

Germany = Archer rush from turn one. This implies activie hunting however, and is contingent on being near at least one AI (since an archer rush will be dicier against a human opponent unless we find him REALLY early).

China and Japan would round out my personal "top five" as their trait combinations are strong, and their slightly later UU's are superb.

If we picked ANY of these, I'd be a happy camper.



-=Vel=-

[Theseus]

Hey, I just had a thought: Do we know difficulty level? What does that mean for the AI civs for the human players? I mean, if we're next to a human EARLY, and they don't have any unit advantage, shouldn't we Archer Rush the bastards into oblivion?

[Velociryx]

Theseus makes an *excellent* point....Human players will have no production advantages....which means that the advantage WILL go to the Industrious player (faster mines = more production = more units). If we start next to a human opponent, we GOTTA make nice with the AI and take said human out, cos they'll be looking to do the same with us.

-=Vel=-
(and another excellent reason to have Industrious as one of our traits!)

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by Theseus
Hey, I just had a thought: Do we know difficulty level? What does that mean for the AI civs for the human players? I mean, if we're next to a human EARLY, and they don't have any unit advantage, shouldn't we Archer Rush the bastards into oblivion?

Looks like its going to be monarch

theres a poll on the forum