militaristic/industrious

[Kirby]

Are there any civs that are currently militaristic/industrious?

Rome is listed as that in the manual but come up as militaristic/commercial in the game.

I have PTW with the latest patch.

[Louis XXIV]

China is Militaristic, Industrious (with the Rider as a Knight replacement that is 4.3.3)

Persia is Scientific, Industrious

Rome is Militaristic, Commercial

Hope that helps

[Kirby]

got it, thanks.

[gunkulator]

Makes China one of the most highly mobile civs, esp in the early to mid game. Workers can build roads quickly while riders advance faster and farther than any ancient unit. GA likely in Middle Ages from Rider. Good chance at leaders.

[Yahweh Sabaoth]

Riders aren't an ancient unit. They're one of two UUs availible with chivalry that gives you a movement of 3, the other one being the Arab Ansar Warrior.

The Rider is a suberb unit... if you haven't played as China yet, do so, and plan to take on some neighbors with the riders. They will last you a long time and net you plenty of great leaders.

[Arrian]

China is one of the best "pure warmonger" civs out there. It is definitely built for speed. You can get the basics for warfare (cities, terrain development, barracks, troops) done with incredible speed. Industrious workers + 20 shield barracks + start with warrior code + Riders later. It's a civ built for war.

-Arrian

[Yahweh Sabaoth]

And the great thing about it is, you'd have to be a real idiot to fall behind in culture as well, playing China. It's easy to dominate your neighbors, for the most part... and China seems to start on good land. With little risk of losing wandering warriors to barbarian attacks, you increase your chances of popping goody huts to gain techs early on, or meeting an AI for the first time with a pair of elite warriors (always good!)

[Arrian]

Yahweh,

That depends on the level. I have an Emperor level game going as China (I think I mentioned this to you, actually) in which I'm behind in culture. On Emperor, the AI bonuses are such that it is difficult for a civ like China to keep up.

As for the barbarians... well, you can lose your exploring warriors just the same as other civs can, but you will get promoted more often if you survive. Thing is, the barbs no longer suicide charge you, so it's a bit less likely that you will have a couple of elites wandering around in 3500bc.

Having said that, I recently got a GL from a barb-promoted archer playing as Rome. I bopped a Russian settler team, and *presto* got a leader. So yeah, it can happen.

The other thing about China's traits: I love it when I start in a forested area as China. Industrious workers make chopping forest really worthwhile to boost early builds. I will often chop to punch out a quick archer as my first or second exploring unit. At the least, that archer is a safe bet to kill a warrior/settler team. At best, he might team up with a warrior or two and take out somebody's capitol.

-Arrian

[Yahweh Sabaoth]

huh... well, I'm a long way off from Emperor buddy. I've still got a lot of Civs to play as Regent... Although, if Civ3 is anything like Civ2, the transition from Regent to Monarch, and onwards to Emperor, ought to be pretty brief. We'll see. I definitely won't be playing as every civ on Monarch, but I may play more than once as China... still #1 in my heart.

Though you gotta love Japan...

[Catt]

Originally posted by Arrian
China is one of the best "pure warmonger" civs out there. It is definitely built for speed. You can get the basics for warfare (cities, terrain development, barracks, troops) done with incredible speed. Industrious workers + 20 shield barracks + start with warrior code + Riders later. It's a civ built for war.

Couldn't agree more. I just played a game as China for the first time in a long time. I was pinned in a pretty small area by the Carthaginians north, the Greeks a bit farther east, and the Indians farther south. I felt the situation called for an archer attack since I really needed more land early in order to compete -- workers built roads to the front, cities built barracks and archers, and Carthage got taken down a peg or two. Of course, going up against numidian mercenaries meant I lost a lot of archers and my attack took longer -- but I secured the land needed.

With sufficient land, cities began producing horsies and workers improved the empire, also building roads to the next victim. Greece had grown dominant, building the Pyramids and was way, way ahead in tech and culture. They helpfully declared war just before I had gotten chivalry, and a hoard of riders began dispatching hoplites left and right. Even against a culturally powerful civ that Greece then was, the 3-move rider can penetrate and attack most cities in the same turn.

But I'd also say that it is quite easy to fall way behind in culture when playing the Chinese -- 60-shield temples and 80-shield libraries mean no easy culture production -- production is more ogften usefully employed playing to the Chinese strengths (units). In the game I am describing, I was as far back culturally as I can remember being so early -- Greece (!) had about 2.5 - 3 times as much culture as I did, and Japan (distant) even more. I was taking size 11 Greek cities and getting 11 resistors. I took 4 of 8 Greek cities, and before I took the 5th city I had suffered 5 culture flips -- Athens alone flipped 3 times. If you exploit the Chinese advantages at warfare (cheap barracks, industrious workers, early archers, and the fearsome rider) it is, IMHO, very easy to be culutrally backward by large margins, but also to have the largest empire. Which of course calls for destroying your cultural rivals to level the playing field a bit

Catt

[gunkulator]

I also just finished a game as China. You are always behind in the culture department however you should be able to snag a lot of wonders with Rider-created GLs. Culture flipping for me was so bad that eventually I would just raze cities. Far away cities are crap anyway.

My two armies of Riders were hugely dominant, able to take out even Musketmen. As an added bonus, I believe your industriousness is also transferred to captured workers. Sure they work at half speed, but they're free and Riders can penetrate far to grad them.

[Arrian]

Which of course calls for destroying your cultural rivals to level the playing field a bit

That's the key. Break things. Lots of things. Hurt the AI enough, and the cultural weakness of China doesn't hurt you (too much). The culture thing is much more of a factor on the upper levels. On Monarch, I hardly notice it. On Emperor, I feel it bigtime.

Speaking of Carthage, Catt, I just finished a MONSTER game with them. In terms of relative strength vs. the AI, it is probably the best game I've played. I got some good luck with leaders, so it was like I was Industrious/Commercial/Militaristic. It was beautiful. 14 great leaders, finished in 1510AD, mid-way through the industrial age. The last 4 leaders were used on normal city improvements (2 cathedrals, 2 collosseums).

Not that huge a score, but I could care less. It's all relative. And I was more than 3x the best (and only remaining) AI civ, with access to all 8 luxuries (ever my goal). It was one of those games where everything went my way.

By the way, an army of 2x swordsmen + 1 numidian mercenary scares the everliving crap out of the AI.

-Arrian

[vmxa1]

Re: militaristic/industrious

Originally posted by Kirby
Are there any civs that are currently militaristic/industrious?

Rome is listed as that in the manual but come up as militaristic/commercial in the game.

I have PTW with the latest patch.

You can find the civs traits in the editor or just start a game and test them.
I guess that is one of the few uses for the PTW guide. Page 16 has all the civs charted for traits.
I probably should verify htey are correct though.

[Daz]

Isnt Germany Militaristic/Industrious...?

[statusperfect]

MIL/SCI