Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Which enemy do you chose?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Arrian
    Hmm, I didn't even notice the "14 knights" part. Depending on map size and the level of play, 14 knights isn't very much.
    -Arrian
    [insert my standard play on a large/huge map only, disclaimer here]. Agreed … thinking about it more … 14 knights would have to mean a very weak target of Chivalry tech or below itself (no access to horses maybe), a small island nation, or finishing off the weak remains of what was already started. If the game allowed one to sue for peace earlier than the five turns (?) or whatever it is, it might be a decent size quick one of two city snatching force.
    "Guess what? I got a fever! And the only prescription is ... more cow bell!"

    Comment


    • #17
      I Will usually attack the close civ because i usally dont want to build 7 gallys that will probably sink on the way there or if I loose i dont want to go all the way back so unless the far civ has somthing i really want i will go for a civ to strengthn my main land and gain control of my contenent.
      Absolute power corrupts absolutely

      Comment


      • #18
        on deity, you start out being the weakest.
        My first concern is to catch up with the AI in tech, i do this by attacking an AI that:

        is close, can offer me techs in peace negotiations, gives me good ground for expanding with FP, are not the greeks.

        Later on, when i am equal in power with the average AI, i will give a preference to attacking the strongest AI (still of course looking at what there is to gain for me)

        14 knights, deity, normal map, could be either one of those. they could be my first knights (upgraded from horsemen) and might still be needed to win an area for expansion, or i could already have an area for expanding and am ready to attack the stongest guy
        Last edited by WackenOpenAir; September 29, 2003, 05:16.

        Comment


        • #19
          14 Knights = 2x his cities

          This brings up a good question:

          Given technological parity, how many of your best attacker do you consider to be a safe margin to start a war?

          Twice as many knights as enemy cities? Three times the number of enemy cities?

          I normally shoot for 2-3 times the enemy city count of "offensive units" and about half the enemy city count of "defensive units" as follow-on/ garrison to start. It seems to be a good amount, with production keeping up with losses fairly well.

          Example:
          In my war against Russia (7 cities, only 2 were 7+ pop) I attacked with 14 knights, 6 longbowmen and 4 "mobile" pikemen.

          The Russians were defending with archers and spearmen (no iron, no horses)

          It was pretty much a walkover.

          Comment


          • #20
            The closest. I remember this one huge map size game, I conquered the English, who were like 3-4 times bigger than me. My point is, Ottomans rock from Military Tradition up to like Motorized Transportation, because Sipahis will be the best units in the game up to Tanks. I had like 25 Sipahis, and 5 Artilleries, and just conquered his ass. I only annexed the cities that had wonders, though. I couldn't risk garrisoning valuable Sipahis to quell resistance. 'Twas fun.

            Comment

            Working...
            X