Why I skip knights

[nbarclay]

Originally posted by Lord Merciless
I think researching Nationalism has its merits:
- Improved defense.
- Mobilization possible.
- But most important of all: you can sell it to the AIs for quite some money.

Is Nationalism really so much more marketable than the other things you could research instead? My inclination is to research down other paths and then trade something else for Nationalism and get a bunch of gold and/or other goodies in the process. Keep in mind that once a few civs have Nationalism, its market value goes way down. Usually, there's someone who has Nationalism and can trade me that but who can't afford to buy my tech in gold, and I can sell my tech to other civs for gold at the same time. Or, probably more likely, I'll get Nationalism thrown into the deal trading my state-of-the-art tech (and maybe some of my luxuries, if necessary) for AI luxuries.

Another possible approach would be to research Nationalism and keep an eye on what the leading AIs are willing to pay for it to figure out when someone's almost finished researching it. Then double-cross them by putting Nationalism on the market yourself, depriving them of the opportunity to sell it. Of course the down sides are (1) it requires close monitoring, which isn't a lot of fun, and (2) if the AI that's in the lead researching Nationalism can't afford to buy it, you have no way of knowing when he's about to discover it.

Incidentally, the "use what an AI is willing to pay to figure out what he's researching and how close he is to finished" trick is a useful manipulation in general if you want to make a profit from selling tech without speeding up AI research too much in the process. Granted, you won't get much out of an AI that's almost finished, but you get the profit from selling the tech to everyone else and, simultaneously, deny the AI that profit.

Nathan

[Arrian]

The AI will sell its soul for Medicine, I can tell you that.

Theseus,

for a while after the AIs have it, they won;t sell it at any (remotely reasonable) price, and even extorting it is difficult. At some point, however, usually prior to Rep Parts, Nationalism goes waaaay down in value, and I'll buy it then.

That is my experience as well.

-Arrian

[Thrawn05]

Thanks for the suggestions. I avoid Horsemen only because the bottom line is that they are no more powerful then archers, (and any unit that retreats is a wimp and traiter!).

Like patton said, I want the other SOB to die for HIS country.


Skipping nationalism is a strange idea, but I will try it out.

Ever since I came up with my knight skipping idea, I tend to win by conquest before nationalism, or just as I or someone else is researching it.

[bbaws]

Got to admit I prefer to leave the AI alone in the ancient era just to make the era of knights and longbowmen a bit more of a challenge. Don't you find that you have actually won the game really early and most of the game is going through the motions until you fulfull a victory conditon?

[Nmintz]

knight strategy is bogus

this is a direct reply to whoever got the idea that skipping knights was a good idea:

first off, on higher levels of difficulty, knights and especially riders (if your playing the chinese, one of the best equipped races in the game), are essential as both a defensive bastion (fighting off scores of barbarian horseman, fortifying in occupied cities until a cheaper, pikeman or musketman can be mustered up and brought forward) and on the offensive for deep penetration. The chinese rider is quite possibly the most powerful unit of the time period, with speed that few other units in the game can match. A shock team of two or three elite knights or riders kept close enough to a borer is good enough to make a technologically inferior foe have second thoughts about an offensive.

Need I mention that a knight travelling with a group of longbowmen makes for an awesome fire and manuever combo?


Nathan

[Jaguar]

Samurai are better units, but Rider armies are truly awesome, now that armies have blitz. 3 attacks in a turn....

To deal with nationalism, I wait until a weak civ gets it, and then I have a hoard of cavalry descend on them, wreaking havoc, and I wait until I can get it from them in a peace settlement.

[vmxa1]

JW, that Avatar is very distracting.
I suppose many strategies can be used, but I am never going to skip my Knights or riders. They are very useful and it is a quick upgrade to Calv when the time comes. Calv is so versitale and can be used all the way to the end. I love to send them out to finish of modern units that were bombarded down to 1 HP. The 3 move points allow them to get back to safety. The Samurai are a tough unit at 442.

[Thrawn05]

Re: knight strategy is bogus

Originally posted by Nmintz
this is a direct reply to whoever got the idea that skipping knights was a good idea:

first off, on higher levels of difficulty, knights and especially riders (if your playing the chinese, one of the best equipped races in the game), are essential as both a defensive bastion (fighting off scores of barbarian horseman, fortifying in occupied cities until a cheaper, pikeman or musketman can be mustered up and brought forward) and on the offensive for deep penetration. The chinese rider is quite possibly the most powerful unit of the time period, with speed that few other units in the game can match. A shock team of two or three elite knights or riders kept close enough to a borer is good enough to make a technologically inferior foe have second thoughts about an offensive.

Need I mention that a knight travelling with a group of longbowmen makes for an awesome fire and manuever combo?


Nathan

When playing rome, all those legionary units double as Pikemenl so the need to build Pikemen is not needed, and with the 3 attack points, still can be a good offensive units if you really need to. By skipping knights, and heading for Caverly unit, you instantly became the top dog of the game. Just sit down and play defensivly for a while.

I suggest to try it. Play as rome and follow my rules.

Try not to bash it if you havn't tried it.

[Thrawn05]

Originally posted by vmxa1
JW, that Avatar is very distracting.
I suppose many strategies can be used, but I am never going to skip my Knights or riders.

I'm not converting anyone to try it... I'm just pointing out that it can be done.

[vmxa1]

That is what I said any number of things can be done. I love Rome, but Legions are slow, once 2 or 3 move units appear. Knocking things you have not tired is perfectly acceptable. Do I need to cut off my arm to know it may be painful. Some things can be inferred, given a proper level of knowledge and experience and I am not trying to convet anyone either, just tossing in my .02. I have little dobt you can do very well indeed with you style.

[nbarclay]

The key to making a strategy of skipping knights and going straight for cavalry work lies in building up enough of a tech lead that the cavalry can do some very serious damage before the prospective victims get Nationalism. So yes, there comes a point past which playing on too high a level makes such a strategy unworkable. But for a good enough researcher, there are situations where doing little or no fighting with knights can work well even on Emperor.

As for knights' ability to defend, cavalry have a lot less NEED to defend than knights do because their speed usually lets them strike from outside the attack range of anything short of enemy fast-movers. Longbowmen and swordsmen haven't got a chance if cavalry keep a captured city's radius between them and the enemy until they're ready to strike to the next city. And if enemy knights or cavalry attack under such circumstances, they're dead the next turn even assuming they win. (One of the things that makes Riders so enormously powerful is that they have the same ability to attack without subjecting themselves to enemy counterattack.)

The speed of riders and cavalry also makes for shorter wars, making it easier to capture large amounts of territory as a Republic without war weariness becoming too much of a problem. For a player like me whose entire philosophy is built around the goal of technological supremacy, that makes an enormous difference.

I'm not arguing that skipping knights is appropriate in every game, and if I'm playing China or Japan, I pretty much invariably make heavy use of my UU. But when the right situation comes up, a strategy of passing over knight-era offensives and skipping to cavalry can be immensely powerful.

Nathan Barclay

[Thrawn05]

Originally posted by vmxa1
That is what I said any number of things can be done. I love Rome, but Legions are slow, once 2 or 3 move units appear. Knocking things you have not tired is perfectly acceptable. Do I need to cut off my arm to know it may be painful. Some things can be inferred, given a proper level of knowledge and experience and I am not trying to convet anyone either, just tossing in my .02. I have little dobt you can do very well indeed with you style.

So you considering winning before nationalism not doing very well?

[Thrawn05]

Originally posted by nbarclay
The key to making a strategy of skipping knights and going straight for cavalry work lies in building up enough of a tech lead that the cavalry can do some very serious damage before the prospective victims get Nationalism. So yes, there comes a point past which playing on too high a level makes such a strategy unworkable. But for a good enough researcher, there are situations where doing little or no fighting with knights can work well even on Emperor.

As for knights' ability to defend, cavalry have a lot less NEED to defend than knights do because their speed usually lets them strike from outside the attack range of anything short of enemy fast-movers. Longbowmen and swordsmen haven't got a chance if cavalry keep a captured city's radius between them and the enemy until they're ready to strike to the next city. And if enemy knights or cavalry attack under such circumstances, they're dead the next turn even assuming they win. (One of the things that makes Riders so enormously powerful is that they have the same ability to attack without subjecting themselves to enemy counterattack.)

The speed of riders and cavalry also makes for shorter wars, making it easier to capture large amounts of territory as a Republic without war weariness becoming too much of a problem. For a player like me whose entire philosophy is built around the goal of technological supremacy, that makes an enormous difference.

I'm not arguing that skipping knights is appropriate in every game, and if I'm playing China or Japan, I pretty much invariably make heavy use of my UU. But when the right situation comes up, a strategy of passing over knight-era offensives and skipping to cavalry can be immensely powerful.

Nathan Barclay

Perhaps I should restate it here to make sure someone sees it (because I don't think that many people are reading my post fully), this only works if you play as Rome. The extra defensive point helps out.

I doubt that this system would work for any other civ.

[Konquest02]

In my last game (Babylon, Regent, standard map, all random) I played peacefully in the early game, expanding my borders really aggressively with the cheap cultural buildings available when playing the Babs. I gained as much territory as possible (read more than all AI) then started to build horsemen.
I didn't resaerched Chivalry and maintained good relations with my neighbors (Persia and Zulu). Up to Military Tradition, I have never been in a serious war and I have a tech and score lead. Once, the Aztecs (2 ladmasses away) declared war because I didn't give them 14 gold although I haven't seen a single unit in the whole war. I sued for peace and they game me all their treasaury.
When I reached millitary tradition, I had a 2-3 tech lead in this branch, although I was really late in the other branch (have not reached education). I took my cavs and destroyed Zululand. They got allied with America, which was far away. I got Astronomy from the Zulu and upgarded my galleys to caravels and destroyed half of their empire.

The moral is: Even though you sacrifice part of your tech lead to get to military tradition, you can get them back in a matter of a few turns. Note that this would not have worked as well if I didn't skip knights and if I didn't build Leo's workshop.

--Kon--

[nbarclay]

Originally posted by Thrawn05
Perhaps I should restate it here to make sure someone sees it (because I don't think that many people are reading my post fully), this only works if you play as Rome. The extra defensive point helps out.

I doubt that this system would work for any other civ.

There may be some nuances to your specific variant of the knight-skipping strategy that only work for Rome, but Rome certainly does not have a monopoly on the fundamental concept If you're high on the power graph, you can usually avoid war even with very little standing army. And if other civs don't attack, the military advantages of legions make no difference to the viability of a strategy that avoids attacking with knights. I even played one game where as the Germans, I captured Moscow early with archers but didn't engage in any more fighting until I had panzers! It worked because with Russia pruned back early, I was able to grab enough land to research quickly up to the modern era without further fighting (and culture flipping two or three English cities didn't hurt).

Nathan Barclay