Civ-Specific Strategy: Arabs

[Zero]

I am copying Dominae's thread here Since Dominae started the American thread, Im opening up a thread for the next civ in the alphabetic order. Ok people give some inputs on how you play the Arabs!



P.S Next thread: Aztecs.

[Mazarin]

well...the combination of their traits religious/expansionist is -imo- quite strange: religious is great on smaller maps where you can take over great terriotory by using your early culture...expansionist is great on large maps...so these two traits don't seem to fit. Dependant on map size/number of opponents i'd try to use one of the traits for the early game, building up some infrastructure and prebuilding lots of Horsemen. Once Chivalry is available I'll upgrade them to Ansar warriors.. IMHO one of the best UUs in the entire game and rush a couple of opponents...I know it's not a real strategy...but it always worked well...the Arabians don't really fit for an early rush due to their lack of ind/mil trait...so i'll usually wait till middle ages.

[Zero]

I disagree. Both Religious and Expanisonistic can be used on large maps effectively. First off, religious trait's biggest strength is not cheap temples but ability to change government quickly. This allows huge civ to maintain war whenever it is necessary. Their power comes from Super fast REXing and being able to maintain a large civ IMO. Iroqouis players should be familiar with this way of play.

Ansars are great. They are basically cheaper rider w/ -1 defense, not cheaper Knights. Since with 3 movements counterattack is less likely, the cheaper mod actually outweighs the minus defense.

[Dominae]

Calc II, great idea! I actually didn't think to start a whole series of these threads when I did the Americans one, but it could be worthwhile. Hopefully this thread will not degenerate into a Corruption or Temple debate (my own fault, I know!).

Having never played the Arabs, I'll skip this one. But I plan to write something about the Aztecs...


Dominae

[Zero]

U helped me spawn off the idea. Hopefully the thread becomes awesome enough for all newbies to hear about it and go directly to the thread of their choice to learn all about their favorite civ.

[Zero]

Now that I think about it, Arabs are mixed style of play with iroqouis and china... in a weird way

[Robber Baron]

I'm playing a game as Abu now, Emporer level. I got a great starting position: river, two wheats. And scouting quickly uncovers two more rivers nearby. Mecca makes a good settler factory. I pop a hut and get a settler within a few turns. This is a fine start! When I get bronze working a few turns later from another goody hut, I decide I will make Medina a wonder city.
When Colossus completes, it triggers my golden age! Ouch! (I probably deserved something unexpected: this start was too good!)
Does Colossus automatically trigger an Arabian Golden Age?

[pvzh]

Yes, although it is not mentioned in Civiolpedia, Colussus is religious as well (Civilopedia states Expansionist/Commertial). Despotic GA is rather bad, but if it is early enough you may try for Pyramids or Oracle (with GA it is much easier to get them). Besides, your settler factory is much more effective now 4 food surplus with granary require some rushing (without GA) even if you build only settlers to stay 6 and under population wise.

[DaveMcW]

Originally posted by Calc II
Now that I think about it, Arabs are mixed style of play with iroqouis and china... in a weird way

I wouldn't compare them to China at all. The Arabs are Iroquois with a knight UU.

expansionist, knight UU...

Sounds like the ultimate civ for Aeson's huge map chariot gambit!

[CiverDan]

The 2 defense for Ansars does not come into play very much because the 3 movement allow you to rush most cities at the start of war without having to stop in their territory first. They also make defending your territory easier.

[VenomLord]

yeah, i was thinking the 2 defence wouldn't matter that much considering you are retreating from everything but riders when you are using them... true you wont always get out alive but thats why they're cheaper

[Brizey]

I don't think that 3-move units can retreat from 2-move units. I have played china a ton, and I don't recall Riders retreating from Knights. Also, MA doesn't retreat from MI.

[BRC]

Brizey is correct.

[jshelr]

Strat for the Arabs = Aeson's scout and expand followed by Ansar rush.

With a little luck, these guys can use the expansionist trait to get an early tech lead, and possibly and early territory lead with a settler pop. Settler pops happen often if you follow the rules in Aeson's expansionist cookbook thread. The use of scouts to get tech lets you (1) find those horses and (2) hoard gold without falling way behind on tech.

People used the Arabs in the latest AU games and you can get the stories there. The AU game presented a tough environment for the exansionist civ caught in the middle geographically. But the Arabs generally did well.

I agree 100% that the religious trait makes them superior to China, despite China's industriousness, due to the ease with which the Arabs slip in and out of governments and the cheap temples they can build in captured ciities. (That is debatable.)

BTW, it is likely that expansionist civs are going to be very popular in human (PTW) games.

[Zero]

Originally posted by DaveMcW


I wouldn't compare them to China at all.

umm chinese riders?