Civ choice for the "builder"

[Yahweh Sabaoth]

On Regent level, I found that the English + land with rivers = tech lead in the ancient era... I wonder if this holds up on Monarch or higher... combine those scouts with the commercial trait, set a high tech level (for most techs) and I found it quite easy to outpace all the civs in terms of techs, even with lots of other expansionists in the mix...

[MysteryMan]

Hey, if you dislike the Expantionist trait, dont' sweat it, you're in good company. The only time it is worth taking is on Large/Huge maps (which for me are impractical as my comp is about as high-tech as today's toaster oven).
On the Tiny/Small settings, it is a pure waste as you take a slot that could be filled with something useful (like, I don't know, industrious) and basically piss it away on an 'advantage' that will be gone by 0AD at the latest.
That being said, I must admit that often the AI civs that piss me off the most are the Expansionist ones. I have been playing around with strategies to manipulate AI civs so they will fight each other and not me. In my last game, I deliberately left a gap in my lines that let the Iraquios expand to my south and the Americans expand to the north. When they met in the middle, there was a BIG boom! When the dust settled, my 'peaceful builder civ' had the largest army on the continent. I could have wiped out the Iraquious more easily, but I eliminated the Americans first (IMHO they are by FAR the worst neighbor of the two). By the time I was done with them, I had gotten so powerful that everyone was afraid of me. No more wars were necessary that game.

[Arrian]

Expansionist can be powerful even on standard maps, because you will most likely meet your neighbors before they meet each other (the thing that screws that up is other expansionists. ). That can really help with initial trading. Add in free techs from huts and maybe a settler, and the trait has done its job.

In the end, I still prefer other traits, but Exp isn't as bad as I used to think it was.

-Arrian

[Yahweh Sabaoth]

I want one of you pros to try the English out - the whole early tech lead thing - just try cranking the tech slider all the way up (without running a deficit) and see what kinda results you get.

[MysteryMan]

I have been playing the last few games of mine as the Aztecs (inspired by a post I read somewhere here) and IMHO the Jag Warrior basically gives the Aztecs the expantionist attribute for free. Maybe the goodie huts are a little less good (although barbarians are just walking experience, waiting to be harvested) but the Jag sure is a lot better than a scout.
However, the aztecs tend to start near expantionist races, so they lose most of the exploration advantage, but hey, they're not only not at a disadvantage, but if an AI civ comes across my undefended city with a scout, big deal. If I come across an undefended city with a Jag, I will take it. Plus they get milataristic and religious, whereas any expantionist civ will only have one trait to stack against that.
Anyways, just my $.02.

[Arrian]

The Aztecs do have an advantage in getting more huts and meeting people faster. However, there are two problems:

1) no expansionist bonus when popping the huts
2) it does take a minimum of 4 turns to build that first Jag. Meanwhile, an expansionist civ has moved their original scout and built another.

There is a third problem with the Aztecs: somebody might just randomly attack one of your Jags... and lose. I've had that happen and it SUCKED. Things were going great right up to the point where some dumbass hit my regular Jag (on mountain) with an elite warrior and lost, triggering my GA in like 1500bc. I was PISSED.

I picked the Aztecs for that game because of the same thing you thought of: "hey, I can basically get the expansionist bonus w/o being stuck with the trait for the rest of the game! Plus, Jags are great for running around and busting up barb camps for 25g each!" But it turns out there is a risk you run.

Plus, I can count the number of times I've seen an undefended AI city on one hand.

Yahweh - I've played the English several times. My team in the PTWDemogameII is playing them right now.

I can tell you that, given time, the English can be solid. Being commercial, they get a valueable tech to trade early on, and a leg up on the race to Republic. But the lack of any building discounts, plus slow workers means they are pretty slow to get going. You need to really concentrate on parlaying any early advantages you get from the exp. trait into something more lasting.

-Arrian

[Yahweh Sabaoth]

I think a lot of folks around here would throw in their lot with the Aztecs, Mystery Man. Maybe not for a builder civ, however, but as the #1 best civ otherwise.

Course, I'm not so sure... didn't score so well in a poll not too long ago... but most folks savor a good swarm o' Jaguars now and then...

[Yahweh Sabaoth]

Yeah, but what about the early tech? Didja try cranking the tech slider all the way up? I wouldn't be surprised if it doesn't work so hot on higher difficulty levels, but I'm still curious.

[vmxa1]

Originally posted by Yahweh Sabaoth
I want one of you pros to try the English out - the whole early tech lead thing - just try cranking the tech slider all the way up (without running a deficit) and see what kinda results you get.

YS I am not sure what you are looking for here! It motivated me to play English (yuck) on a large map at Emperor, so I may not forgive you (map is too big to suit me). I do not really try to have an early tech lead as I will tend to have the research at 10% for the first two tiers of tech and wait for the last ones to up it to what ever I can stand, read no or little defict.
If you are playing on Regent, then you can get out in front and stay there from the start. At Monarch, it is more a case of start location and interest. That is, I some times will hold the lead at Monarch from the start and some times not till the next age.
At Emperor with an expansion civ, I will likely have lots of the early techs, but may fall back a bit and just stay in contact with the tech leaders.
I am not familar with this map size, so I am sort of feeling my way.
I am doing Rep and have just traded all my techs that they did not have , so we are even. I will soon fall behind due to the switch in governents. I suspect I will have contacts first as I have many gallies out and the AI seems to only have one that it is using to ferry a spear and settler.
I am also trying camps for the first time, so who knows what will happen.

[Egbert]

Originally posted by Arrian

Plus, I can count the number of times I've seen an undefended AI city on one hand.

Yahweh - I've played the English several times. My team in the PTWDemogameII is playing them right now.

I can tell you that, given time, the English can be solid. Being commercial....

-Arrian

I can count the number of undefended AI cities I have seen on one finger.

The English are great for Regent Level games. The expansionist trait gets on off to a good start, goody huts etc

The commercial starts off useless (zero value in 4000 BC) but just keeps getting better. Early development is harder with the English (god I miss industrious and religious) but you keep going from strength to strength. If you get out of the Ancient Age with a decent empire you just go from strength to strength. The problem is getting out of the Ancient Age with a decent empire, no problem at Regent but becomes a serious problem at higher levels.

The English are OK at Monarch but if I try an Emperor game I prefer Egypt or the Babs because it will take me longer to lose with them.

[vmxa1]

They are failry decent in this map (emperor). I went into anarchy to switch to Rep with tech all even. No wars, no settler bops as the map is too large.

[Egbert]

Originally posted by vmxa1
They are failry decent in this map (emperor). I went into anarchy to switch to Rep with tech all even. No wars, no settler bops as the map is too large.

Umh, you are doing rather better at Emperor than I do. Maybe with a more practice and more adherence to sound strategy I could make the English work for me at higher levels too.

So it wasn't you that was responsible for the Americans and Germans going downhill?

[Yahweh Sabaoth]

Vmxa1: Did you try cranking the tech value (research) all the way up, as high as it can go without running a deficit, during the exploration/REX phase? I assume this technique would be relatively worthless without plenty of rivers, or high-trade squares, to found your cities near... but it works wonders, combined with scouting, on Regent. I know Regent is for weaklings and slime, but I sort of assume that, aside from greater threat and more potent scouting on behalf of the AI, the basic principle would be the same on higher difficultly levels.

Obviously, leaving tech at 10% is solid for many strategies, but the whole point of the strategy I was suggesting - JUST for experimentation, mind you, I don't presume that I know this game as well as you - was to crank the tech slider all the way UP (to 80% or 90%, say) and letting the enhanced trade of rivers do some of the research work for you - coupled with roads and lots of scouts, of course.

I'll try it again on Monarch someday. Probably not for a while though. I just played as the Romans and French and need to get away from Commercial for awhile.

[vmxa1]

YS during the early part of the game, increasing the slider would have done nothing, but waste gold. I increased research rate as soon as it had an impact. Well more or less, I mean I did not increase it if going from 10 to 50 did nothing. I did not check if going to 90 or 100 would go anything. Often I needed to have some spent on lux. That would vary from 10-30%, mostly at 10% to keep the citizens in line. I only now have started to get markets and cath.
Remember that at Regent you research at 100% effectivness and at Emperor it is 80%. IOW it cost more to research.

[Yahweh Sabaoth]

Oh, I didn't realize that. In my idiocy, I thought that it was a matter of the AI having an advantage, not the player having a disadvantage. Time to me to reread my manual I reckon.