I can't believe this..

[Velociryx]

A very good point, vond. I don't know what it is about this guy, but there's just something in his attitude that BEGS for it. Still, you're right....restraint....restraint.

Too bad he'll never write me that e-mail tho. That'd be fun....

-=Vel=-

[vondrack]

Originally posted by Velociryx
I don't know what it is about this guy, but there's just something in his attitude that BEGS for it.

Yep, I know what you mean... it is much like having a rash, isn't it? You know you should not scratch it, but the need is so strong... even though you are normally wise and follow what your doc says, you still scratch it...

That's what HSS is counting on.

[SpencerH]

Originally posted by HappySunShine
Either you're legally retarded or you don't know how to read since there is really no such thing as paying attention a computer.

Barracks heal units in 1 turn, since you're not having to move anywhere having veteran units is obviously better than having non vets.

In a 2 movement war a regular chariot is going to kill a veteran chariot just as easily as a veteran chariot kills a regular.

However it is sheer stupidity to attack a veteran spearman in a city with a WC.

Some brilliant points there.

[Theseus]

(Completely staying out of the fray... and DISCUSSING CIV3!)

It seems to me that Japan would be superior for the most effective early fastmover rush.

Starting with The Wheel, I would prebuild Chariots for a Horse rush.

First, the timing is the same as Egypt's... research one tech.

Second, pre-building rocks... what would Egypt be doing while researching?

Third, Horsemen are better.

Fourth, and here's the place for discussion, I would prefer Militaristic over Industrious. Yes, Ind will allow you to build a military road network faster, but I disagree with HSS as to the value of barracks, ESPECIALLY for a fastmover-based strategy. As Mil, barracks are cheap as dirt, and while the value of an extra hp is not to be ignored, the real benefit is in retreat odds. HSS is right, the initial objective is not city capture, but total enemy disruption; BUT, at some point, whether for the accomplishment of final objectives, or 'cause the enemy plays a tough defense, you have to go after 'hardened' units... and higher retreat odds provides a smart way to soften them.

All dependent, of course, on the MP configuration. A small duel, for instance, would argue for the early Egyptian GA, while a longer game argues for Japan.

[HappySunShine]

And let's talk about that strategy a bit further, shall we? Gotta stay on topic and all, right? So....you say you don't need barracks. That they don't matter in terms of the rush. I say that the weakness of your strategy is this: Barracks first and then troops = 25% more capability per troop (extra hp = harder to kill). If you think a player would have his workers and support units just sitting out in the field waiting to be picked off by you, you're insane. Even in SP, players don't do that when there are baddies trolling nearby. And how will they know? Spotter units. Spearmen fortified on hills and mountains (defensive bonuses, plus more hp's than your regulars). Attack what you can kill.....so if you get your attack force on-scene and realize that you can't kill jack, you've wasted your time and production cos you've played your hand. Good strat! Send me that e-mail and we'll talk more!

Well if you build barracks first that means you've sacrificed production of military units, not to mention you will still need to build a temple which means increased maintenence. The idea of a rush is to hit early. If barracks were so useful I would have used them in civ2MP. And of course 1 HP isn't really that big a difference with this combat system. Especially since elite units can lose to regular units. If their workers aren't building roads or doing something then they're useless. If they bring their workers inside their city to protect them, they're still just as useless. I'll consider that a job well done. Spearmen fortified on mountains is a complete waste since there is no such thing as ZOC anymore. I think this pretty much proves the fact that you always have and always will be an SP rookie. We had a similiar discussion in the civ2 MP forum about you and I said then that you were nothing more than pretty words with no real skill. You went on for a week with attacks, this suddenly wanting to take it to email is an obvious sign I am beginning to expose your limitations. It's obvious by this last post that you just don't know what the hell you're talking about.

[Velociryx]

I made a week's worth of attacks? Funny that when you make mention of my "attacks" on you, you don't use quotes, but are quite fond of them most other times. Care to point out all my blatant, vicious attacks? C'mon....quote me! Show me my vicious attacks on you!

I'll wait right here while you do that. And if you DO happen to find any attacks I made on you, take a gander at the posts of yours they were in response to, and see if I used far, far less venom. 'k?

-=Vel=-

[Velociryx]

PS: Note in my post I specifically did *not* say "blocking units." Rather, the term was "spotting units."

But you're right, of course. Knowing where the enemy is....bah! Useless info. 'Specially for gods.

-=Vel=-

[SpencerH]

It seems to me that the Aztecs or the Zulus would be a much more suitable choice for a disruption type of rush (since you dont want to attack defended towns). Given their 2 defense impis are great for this tactic.

[HappySunShine]

I made a week's worth of attacks? Funny that when you make mention of my "attacks" on you, you don't use quotes, but are quite fond of them most other times. Care to point out all my blatant, vicious attacks? C'mon....quote me! Show me my vicious attacks on you!

I'll wait right here while you do that. And if you DO happen to find any attacks I made on you, take a gander at the posts of yours they were in response to, and see if I used far, far less venom. 'k?

An attack is an attack, I don't care what degree of name calling you use.

PS: Note in my post I specifically did *not* say "blocking units." Rather, the term was "spotting units."

But you're right, of course. Knowing where the enemy is....bah! Useless info. 'Specially for gods.

How ****ing dumb can you be? Spotting units? Oh my god. I think this pretty much says it all. First of all, if you're going to be stupid enough to waste a unit as a spotter, use a warrior. Second of all a good offense is better than a good defense. Not only are you wasting money on maintaining that useless unit on the mountain but you're wasting production time. And what exactly will spotting my chariot do? You know the rush is coming, you know the goal isn't to take cities, so how does having a spotter protect your workers? Spearmen cost as much as a war chariot, so you won't be gaining any production advantage. So yes, you are correct, completely useless info from a completely useless player.

[Velociryx]

Still waiting on those quotes, Sunshine....

-=Vel=-

PS: Good GOD but this guy should start his own think tank! Recon units are useless! Imagine the money our own US military could save! It's a miracle!

[HappySunShine]

It seems to me that the Aztecs or the Zulus would be a much more suitable choice for a disruption type of rush (since you dont want to attack defended towns). Given their 2 defense impis are great for this tactic.

Impis aren't that bad an idea, however having an attacking units is always better than having a defensive unit. All you can do with impis is attack unprotected workers or attack the lone chariot from time to time. The real thing you're looking to kill is that protected settler going to make a city. That's where impis and jaguars fall short. Aztec jaguars are too weak to do any real damage. By the time they get there the other guy will have war chariots. And again, the Egyptian economy is just too much for the Aztecs. Unless you start like 10 squares apart I don't see how jaguars will be that useful.

[HappySunShine]

PS: Good GOD but this guy should start his own think tank! Recon units are useless! Imagine the money our own US military could save! It's a miracle!

Last time I checked this game wasn't real life you idiot. So yes, recon units are completely useless. What a joke this has become. You no longer even show the slightest bit of competence in this discussion.

As for quotes, go read pages 11, 12, and 13. Refer to the whole discussion about me needing to change my ways. Yes, that's an attack, you just used a more elegant tone than I do. But it is an attack nonetheless. I'm fine with attacks, but don't try to act like you're an angel because it's just not going to work.

[Velociryx]

No sir. That was the TRUTH. If it hurts, that's a different issue and perhaps something you should consider carefully.

As to your latest comments, I'll go slow here, cos this is tough:

1) Civ is meant to be an abstraction of human history
2) War is a part of human history
3) War is fought by...military
4) Military uses recon units
5) Information in battle is valuable
6) Recon units provide information
7) Recon units have value

Amazing....

-=Vel=-

[sabrewolf]

HSS, there's a difference between vel's attacks ("consider bla bla") and your attacks ("you idiot", "shut the **** up", "dumb rookie", etc.)

i think we're all looking forward to take out your regulars and get your defenseless, improvementless cities with our spotting units.

btw: a warrior IS a unit... a weak one, but a unit after all. and if he can detect your attack force 6 turns earlier than the cultural border would... the defender has a biiig advantage...

ah yes... and if you now attack me too: please try and use arguments and not just insults... thanks

[HappySunShine]

No sir. That was the TRUTH. If it hurts, that's a different issue and perhaps something you should consider carefully.

As to your latest comments, I'll go slow here, cos this is tough:

1) Civ is meant to be an abstraction of human history
2) War is a part of human history
3) War is fought by...military
4) Military uses recon units
5) Information in battle is valuable
6) Recon units provide information
7) Recon units have value

Amazing....

Ok, I called you a moron. That was the TRUTH. If it hurts, that's a different issue and perhaps something you should consider carefully.

1) That's your own opinion and obviously not shared by the civ2 MP players.
2) Obviously.
3) Thank you again Captain Obvious.
4) In real life it does, but last time I checked civ wasn't a real life game.
5) In civ it's really not.
6) What little information they provide you should already know. And WC provide far more information as they pillage and rape your women than a couple of spearmen fortified on mountains ever would.
7) Recon units are useless. It's a fact. You've never played MP before, you're an SP rookie and really have no right to even talk to me. Like I said, we knew you had no skill before Civ3 even came out.

Yes, your stupidity is quite amazing.