I can't believe this..

[Theseus]

I agree, 1337 way overstated his level... but it turns out he could at least face it, which was cool.

Why WCs?

Let me try: Earliest 2-attack as a fastmover (and cheap), and industrious lets you build forward military roads. Religious is irrelevant?

I totally agree... I think the WC, and Egypt, have been underthought as a warmonger / rush civ. Obviously, terrain being an issue.

I haven;t spent much time or effort with JWs or Impi's... I think in the right hands they can be great, but damn, 1 attack seems weak to me.

Re SP versus MP, I am sure what you say is true, the best way to learn will be to play and watch.

[HappySunShine]

The egyptian war chariot rush is basically the exact same thing as the horserush in civ2. Only difference is it's not an all terrain unit and you research the wheel instead. The really fast roads make such a huge difference. Even really far away horses are easily accessible. Not to mention that as I said Economy is more important than military. Kill the other guy's economy while yours stays intact. It's all about using the smallest number of units to inflict the most damage. That's why random combat results will basically kill the game if it's still in PTW. But of course we're dealing with complete idiots at Firaxis so it probably will stay. Lets face it, without Brian Reynolds Sid isn't ****. But back to the point, the increased speed of mining means you can get pyramids incredibly fast. Plus you get really cheap temples which means you can build a city wherever you want. And really cheap temples are needed in order to get the fastest wonder speed possible. And lets not forget the fact that there is no anarchy, another huge plus. I don't know what the corruption level of PTW is going to be. The way I have my game set right now is like it is in civ2. I disallowed pop rushing, lowered corruption, got rid of the idea of having a set limit of cities that are useful, made resources so they can never disappear, and some other things that will be needed in MP to make it work.

[Theseus]

Originally posted by HappySunShine
... The really fast roads make such a huge difference. ...It's all about using the smallest number of units to inflict the most damage. ... But back to the point, the increased speed of mining means you can get pyramids incredibly fast. Plus you get really cheap temples which means you can build a city wherever you want.

Agreed. Agreed. Agreed.

Just theorizing here, but knowing that the above will be the aggressor's creed, I think I'd do the same: build a fastmover flex defense force (probably WCs), let the attacker burn out on my defenses, and then go for the kill.

Roads must be insanely important.

[vondrack]

Originally posted by HappySunShine
The way I have my game set right now is like it is in civ2. I disallowed pop rushing, lowered corruption, got rid of the idea of having a set limit of cities that are useful, made resources so they can never disappear, and some other things that will be needed in MP to make it work.

Why is this necessary to make MP work? I can see reasons for making resources stay... even though I would not agree, since they are taking the luck element out of the game. But what is the reason for getting rid of the corruption due to the number of cities model?

[Coracle]

Originally posted by jimmytrick
As I said before, intel will be key and how will we get it?

In SMAC you could infiltrate and know what the opponent had and see the units that were in bases. This would allow you to be prepared if you had the tech.

Now with Civ3 this stuff is not available. Too expensive to investigate cities and spies come too late.

It seems we will be playing blind and maybe this factor will force us all to play rush games.

Sigh. Just ANOTHER reason to mod the game. Edit down the cost of investigating cities and give diplomats more spy-like capabilities. Everything related to Espionage is absurdly expensive, especially since its best use is only to get other civs to declare war on you.

Rush games. Like ICS, just another trick; a gimmick, the result of inadequate playtesting, that makes the game seem more artificial, less realistic, and more easily manipulated. In otherwords, less fun.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by HappySunShine That's why random combat results will basically kill the game if it's still in PTW. But of course we're dealing with complete idiots at Firaxis so it probably will stay. Lets face it, without Brian Reynolds Sid isn't ****.

Good luck Binky.

Yeah, I'll be waiting for you and your chariots. Heh.

[Zachriel]

Originally posted by HappySunShine
It's all about using the smallest number of units to inflict the most damage. That's why random combat results will basically kill the game if it's still in PTW.

That's why random combat results will basically kill {your} game if it's still in PTW.

As I stated before, the results are not random, but probabilistic. You need to adjust your strategies accordingly. I don't agree that the rush has been ended and I certainly intend to use the rush to extend my empire in PtW. But even if the rush was no longer an effective strategy, that would not "kill" the game as there are many other strategies available.

[SpencerH]

Originally posted by HappySunShine
The egyptian war chariot rush is basically the exact same thing as the horserush in civ2. Only difference is it's not an all terrain unit and you research the wheel instead. The really fast roads make such a huge difference. Even really far away horses are easily accessible. Not to mention that as I said Economy is more important than military. Kill the other guy's economy while yours stays intact........But back to the point, the increased speed of mining means you can get pyramids incredibly fast. Plus you get really cheap temples which means you can build a city wherever you want. And really cheap temples are needed in order to get the fastest wonder speed possible. And lets not forget the fact that there is no anarchy, another huge plus.

The Egyptians can be very good choice (and they are one of my favorites) except of course when you dont have access to horses early on.

I don't know what the corruption level of PTW is going to be. The way I have my game set right now is like it is in civ2. I disallowed pop rushing, lowered corruption, got rid of the idea of having a set limit of cities that are useful, made resources so they can never disappear, and some other things that will be needed in MP to make it work.

So when are you going to play CIV3 ?

[Velociryx]

Your benevolent Happiness, you've made some good points in your last couple of posts, however this is hardly anything new or original. All of us "no-talent" guys have been talking about this stuff over in the strat forum for months (speed over power, Egyptians rock, etc.) Just so you know.

And I noted how you artfully dodged the meat of my posts (and others) by falling back on the old "you guys are all just a bunch of computer geeks with no life and no friends." Most intriguing of all is how you ascribed that very phrase to whining rookies a few pages back on this very thread, and yet fall back on it so quickly when confronted with arguments for which you can find no valid response.

Oh....I wasn't supposed to point that out though, was I?

You have a great day, now...'k?

-=Vel=-

Edit: Btw, I'm sure in your vast store of godly knowledge, you're aware that your post re: defense and barracks is entirely contradictory (ie - "barracks don't matter all that much unless you're defending in a city" on the one hand and "only a fool would attack a city, what you gotta do is surround the opponent's city" - So, you're saying that the BEST plan you can come up with is to use regulars (no barracks) to surround the enemy's city (figuring of course that since he's defending there, he'll have a barracks, and thus veterans).

Just wanted you to know I was paying attention.

-V.

[Incan_Warrior]

Somebody call the vet.... we've got a dead horse here.

[HappySunShine]

Your benevolent Happiness, you've made some good points in your last couple of posts, however this is hardly anything new or original. All of us "no-talent" guys have been talking about this stuff over in the strat forum for months (speed over power, Egyptians rock, etc.) Just so you know.

Talking about it and executing it perfectly are two different things. I'm well aware of what rushes and strategies you guys have talked about. This attempt to show some sign of competence is pathetic at best. I wasn't the one that came up with the horserush in civ2, that was Kaak. However I took it well beyond the idea and turned it into a standard of play. I will do the same with the strategies in civ3.

And I noted how you artfully dodged the meat of my posts (and others) by falling back on the old "you guys are all just a bunch of computer geeks with no life and no friends." Most intriguing of all is how you ascribed that very phrase to whining rookies a few pages back on this very thread, and yet fall back on it so quickly when confronted with arguments for which you can find no valid response.

First of all, there hasn't been much meat in your posts. If there were Ming wouldn't be telling you to shut the **** up. Second of all, saying "at least I have a life" after losing a game is very rookie. If you're stupid and can't understand the difference between what I said 50 posts back and what I just now said then I can't do much for you. I really don't see how my two statements even remotely contradict each other or are in any way related. There are morons everywhere I guess.

Oh....I wasn't supposed to point that out though, was I?

Point what out? Don't get ahead of yourself there buddy, you have yet to post anything that would require me to respond with anything other than the usual lines.

Edit: Btw, I'm sure in your vast store of godly knowledge, you're aware that your post re: defense and barracks is entirely contradictory (ie - "barracks don't matter all that much unless you're defending in a city" on the one hand and "only a fool would attack a city, what you gotta do is surround the opponent's city" - So, you're saying that the BEST plan you can come up with is to use regulars (no barracks) to surround the enemy's city (figuring of course that since he's defending there, he'll have a barracks, and thus veterans).

Just wanted you to know I was paying attention.

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. Let me try to put this into words even you can understand. 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. It really doesn't ****ing matter if the guy has a barracks or not, the idea of the rush is still the same. You obviously can't grasp this idea. I simply pointed out the uselessness of barracks in a rush, which again you obviously did not comprehend. Now, if we're not attacking cities, what are we attacking? Think hard on this one now, I know it's difficult for you. Only things you should be attacking in a rush are units you know you can win against. So capturing workers, picking off settlers, pillaging, and killing military units when you can is the tactical idea. The strategical idea (yet another thing you don't seem to understand) is to force the guy on the defensive, ravage his economy, and disorganize his units so they'll be chasing you instead of hitting your own economy. Now I really truly hope some dim sign of enlightenment is now occuring as you're reading this. However after your recent posts I'm beginning to think there is no hope.

And just a little word of advice, it's usually not a good idea to start claiming victory or saying things like "Oh....I wasn't supposed to point that out though, was I?" until you've actually made sure you're right or that I have no way to respond. So, "You have a great day, now...'k *****?"

[Velociryx]

Sunny, you're so *cute* when you get riled up! Since you can't seem to help but resort to name calling when someone calls your bluff, kindly continue this conversation with me via e-mail so as not to muck up the boards with your spew.

I *do* hope you write me that e-mail tho....you're providing some really terrific entertainment value this morning!

-=Vel=-
(WebMaster@velociryx.every1.net)

[HappySunShine]

Sunny, you're so *cute* when you get riled up! Since you can't seem to help but resort to name calling when someone calls your bluff, kindly continue this conversation with me via e-mail so as not to muck up the boards with your spew.

I *do* hope you write me that e-mail tho....you're providing some really terrific entertainment value this morning!

Oh give me a break. You said the exact same thing back on page 1 and what page are we on now? That line might have worked if you had actually followed through on it since you're relying on your upstanding reputation to be the more mature man. However since you've already said that once and you then continued it's not exactly useful anymore. You also seem to have taken advantage of the week or so that I was gone to make all kinds of attacks so lets stop with the act and get back to business. If you can't come back with anything else just say so, but please don't insult my intelligence with this lame comeback.

[vondrack]

Vel, I suggest we leave this HappyGuy be. It's even easier to "communicate" with almost-never-responding Coracle... however ridiculous is, what he says over and over. HSS is here just to show us how great and godly he is, to boast, and offend other people. He may be great, he may be not, PtW will show...

Do we really have nothing better to do but respond to him? I know I am shooting myself in the foot, 'cause I did take my part in this thread "discussion", but I have realized (albeit very late, to my greatest shame) it's wasting time, nothing else. He can't hear what we are telling him and he has very little to tell us, as all his rush theories are just... well, theories... Unless we really enjoy this futile oral ping-pong, I suggest leaving this thread die.

After all, he himself admitted that being the most hated person @ Poly is fun... If we start ignoring him, he may stop having fun and go away...

[Velociryx]

I know....it's funny, isn't it? More than a week and you still don't have the guts to contact me and continue this privately. You'd rather feed your ego with the online drama, or whatever it is you get out of your public displays.

Someone picks apart your "strategy" and your reflexive response is to start the ol' name calling routine up again. Why? To deflect attention away from whatever central issues are being discussed.

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!

-=Vel=-