Triple Threat - The Joys of Being a Bloodthirsty Barbarian

[Velociryx]

took too long to finish that post, and wound up cross-posting with a bunch of ya!

Arrian! Soon as I'm done here, I'm off to go get some religion! And a GREAT title, btw! (and I'll be giving that Japanese strat a go!)

Catt: Very true, good sir! I'm definitely not hawking the Aztec as the end all of civs--and by and large agree that the balancing of the civs is pretty good--but I *do* have a whale of a good time when I'm playing them, and under map conditions I encounter more often than not (Vel is not a big fan of 'pelago maps...UGH!..LOL), they're a pretty solid, if not downright scary civ...as you say though, get stuck alone or nearly so, and your main advantages evaporate.

-=Vel=-

[Capt Dizle]

Amusing that Vel the SMAC ultra builder, known for Doc: Defense, etc. has been remade into the Civ3 version of Ghengis Khan.

Were the Aztecs really a militaristic civ?

[Velociryx]

Yeah....the irony of that still brings a smile...heh!

And as to your question...ohhhh yes! Pretty much the whole Aztec Empire was built on the backs of tribes they conquered (later used against them to gruesome effect).

-=Vel=-
(Ghengis Vel? )

[Catt]

Originally posted by Velociryx
I see that Txurce beat me to the punch where the question of workers is concerned, and my answer echoes his. When I'm playing the Aztec...once I've got the continent mapped, there are quite literally TONS of workers out in the field...alone, unescorted...just sitting there like fruit on a vine. [ . . . . . ] If possible, I'll have a pair of jags shadow a warrior/settler team as he leaves the capitol, bound for parts unknown...that's the second shot in the war...take out the warrior, settler converts to two more free workers.

Vel & Txurce -- maybe I get too aggressive with my Jags -- I find myself attacking the first neighbor I come to, often while he has only 3 or 4 cities, and certainly before I map the whole continent. Can't get many workers that way, I just have always felt compelled to get the attack underway before someone starts building spearmen, swordsmen or horsies in numbers. Next time I play the Aztecs I'll delay war a bit longer, and put out a few tracking teams. (BTW, been playing Monarch - maybe at Diety my perceived worker drought goes away).

1) Maximize your ancient era worker captures whenever possible! This means shamelessly raiding and stealing the workers of other civs any time you see them. It also means keeping a sharp eye out for settler teams. If you're striking as early as you should be with the Green Terror, then the settlers will be guarded by a lone warrior in most cases. A pair of jags can *easily* take down the lone defender and net you a possible promotion and a pair of workers. Sweeeeet....

Question: do you honor the 20-turn peace treaty, or seize opportunities whenever they present themselves? I have been accused by others of being too sensitive to my diplomatic reputation, and rarely attack again within the 20-turn peace.

Vel is not a big fan of 'pelago maps...UGH!..LOL

I haven't found too many people who like archipelago maps! I don't much care for them -- they can really stunt the growth of all civs (AI and human). But I've had a lot of fun recently playing random everything (without even knowing what the random choices turn out to be until I actually explore the map), and muddling through with whatever gets thrown at me. Playing Zulu on an archipelago, lone civ on island, jungle-infested, lots of mountains, no barbarians (and no goody huts) is a fun challenge . . . the first time, at least

Catt

[Txurce]

JawaJocky, WCs upgrade to knights.

Catt, with regard to the "slave horde" issue, maybe a better way of looking at is that the Aztecs are in a better position than most to snag free help. But yes, in certain circumstances, it'll be hard to do so... which leaves them no worse off than any non-industrious civ.

I think that, UU aside, the Aztecs have a great set of traits... traits which admittedly drop to the middle of the pack in isolation. Who's better, in isolation? Religious civs who are industrious or scientific, in my opinion, and maybe scientific/industrious. That's not many.

I tend to respect the 20-turn rule, but break it if, like Arrian, I intend to leave no witnesses, if it's really tempting, or if it's hard to see the downside, given my relative strength.

Vel, I can see the later building of spearmen as a sort of perfectionism, and certainly the upgrading to swordsmen for the civ that's too big and tough. Even the archers make sense, for the occasional big enemy unit. But once horsemen arrive, wouldn't it make sense to tilt one way or the other: toward horsemen, or srticking with JWs? It seems to me that they do the same things, and it comes down to a P/E ratio.

[punkbass2000]

Ya know, I'm really glad Vel's back. For a while there, there weren't a lot of posts in the Strategy Forum, nor many that we're really more 'pure' strategies like these.

[Solver]

Thinking about how would this work in MP. Probably not. As soon as I find out I'm starting near the Aztecs, I'll go ultra-heavy on my defenses. Sparman here. He comes up with 5 jags, I get another spear here. So I'll suck the resources out of the Aztecs. Even better if I'm Greek.

I feel that Civ 3 MP will start with early rushes, so I'm gonna love the Greeks - one tech from Swordsmen and excellent defence.

[Txurce]

Solver, going extra heavy on your defenses means you have fewer resources to devote to expansion... either way, it's not good to start next to the Aztecs in MP, unless you're the civ you picked out: the Greeks. You're probably right that this is the safest civ to play in MP.

[Solver]

I was only meaning Greeks in my last post. Because then the resources I lose with building Hoplites are less than the resources that Aztecs will lose if trying to overcome me with Jaguars.

I guess Greeks could be the builder's choice in MP, for they're the only civ whom the others will try to avoid attacking in the Ancient Age. Oh, though I also loved the Romans for their early warfare.

[Nakar Gabab]

You know, I wonder how this strategy would work with the Zulu.

Think about it. It's a difference between exp/rel, which to many may not seem so great, but there is something to consider... expansionist's time to shine *is* the ancient era, right at the beginning of the game.

Think about it this way. The Impi is functionally identical to the jag: unrestricted double-movement ages before horses and far cheaper to boot. The Impi, however, is twice as expensive and attacks at 1... but the Impi also has twice the defensive ability.

With the Zulu, you can afford to be aggressive early on, combining archers (you're militaristic, remember?) and scouts (you're expansionist, remember?) to hit ANYTHING around you... since you're expansionist, you snag a goodie hut and always get something nice. How much you wanna bet you'll get Bronze Working? Exactly my point.

Once you have bronze working, start pumping out units. Setting up farms is even better for this, if you can manage. Get a barracks up if you can, then start pumping out Impis. If you're rushing, they still cost the same as a jag (20 shields is 20 shields, 10 of which are 'wasted' rushing a jag), and I find very often that there's only a 1-2 turn difference.

Additionally, you get archers and scouts, and the chance to get a settler from a goodie hut (and oh, woe on your foes if this happens). You sacrifice the wave-upon-wave cheap attacker mentality, but you can afford to play with a bit more finesse, as you'll have a numbers advantage on attack (if your archers can keep up), you'll be equal to any unit, even jags on offense (Impi and Jag are an even match if the Impi is attacking), and unparalleled on the defense.

Consequently, when you take a city, it stays taken. And getting reinforcements is just as easy as it is with the Aztecs... but your defenders are better.

I don't play the Zulu much, but I'm beginning to see how this strategy of Vel's could be put to VERY good use for other militaristic civs, not just the Aztecs. The only problem, of course, is UUs. The Chinese UU is an early medieval unit... not much use there, so they're stuck with archers. Rome? Commercial won't tide you over until Iron Working with this strat, so you either need to be lucky or skilled to extort the techs you need, and even then, legionaries come way too late to use in this manner. Germany? Nope, their UU is late industrial. Japan reaches its zenith (and oh what a zenith) later in the ancient/medieval period, and they don't start with archers (chariots are too limited and expensive to even compare to Jags or Impis).

So I think this strat works pretty much only with the Aztecs, and to a lesser extent (call it the Archer Rush Warrior Horde Hybrid strategy), the Zulu. It's a bit hard to say which will do better. I suspect the Aztec rush will hit faster, and is probably more likely to cripple civs with dangerous defensive UUs (Greece, Rome, other scientifics) before their time. But the Zulu will have greater variation, a possible tech lead, more cities, and generally fewer losses due to superior attack/defense. I wonder, however, if the Zulu can hit a spearman-equipped force before they can out-defend your Impis.

Well, at least you can pillage and fortify to besiege them with your Impis...

[Sava]

You make some good points Vel, but overall, the Aztecs suck in the long run. The Jag-bag-warrior is the second to worst unit in the game (next to warrior). The only thing its good for is taking cities early in the game and capturing workers. Once your rivals get spearmen, they become almost useless. It takes 4-5 to take out a spearman sometimes, where I could use 1-2 horsemen/swordsmen.

If you're playing on a tiny world pangea, then Aztecs might be decent for an early conquest victory. Other than that, they suck.

[punkbass2000]

uh, 1-2 horsemen/swordsmen costs just as much as 4-5 jags.

[Arrian]

1 horseman = 30 shields
1 swordsman = 30 shields
1 jag = 10 shields

So it makes sense. I'd rather use horsemen, but that's because I prefer to fight later. I want the AI to build me some cities, and I want the AI to produce a bunch of units for mine to kill. I want leaders.

-Arrian

[Lawrence of Arabia]

I used to always play Americans, but then yesterday I tried out the Greeks for the first time. All what I can say is "D@mn" Two hoplites in your city will stop anything (even a Schwarm of Fa.. I mean Jag warrios . The only problem I see is slow road construction and hardly any exploration.

1 jag warrior = 10 Shields
Jag Warrior = 1.1.2
1 hoplite = 20 shields
Hoplite = 1.3.1

It will take more than 2 jag warriors to take out a hoplite in a town with barracks. Therefore, it seems that it will cost you more to take the town. Of course, once you take it and eliminate the civ, you can say it was worth it. But you will need to spent more dinero to take a greek city, then any other civ city in the ancient era. Anceitn era combat betwen these two civs may also result in a golden age for BOTH of them.

[Gen.Dragolen]

The Aztec Human Wave Assualt

Vel,

It must be your luck of the draw with starting positions that makes this tactic work: I have tried the Aztecs at Regent a couple of times and have started in the middle of Jungles surround by deserts. And to cap it off, the neighbours were always other Militaristic Computer Civs (CC). I found that the Jags, while nice as scouts and barbarian killers, they performed less than admirabley in combat against spearmen.

As it is written, "...5 to 1, your chances of victory are even" so I tried using 10 jags in a raiding party against a new town in a jungle (Dyes all around, and they beat my settler there by 1 turn) and he had only 1 regular spearman defending. I lost 10 jags and the CC got an elite spearman for my troubles...

This episode was repeated a little later when all of my neighbours formed alliances against me (all 4 of them on a smallish continent on a standard map) and their swordsmen came to discuss what they were going to do with my capital after I was dead. They did their usual number on spearmen in a walled town. The end of the Aztecs in that game came around 0BC. Starting your assualt has to be as early as possible.

Granted this was before the 1.21 patch, but I suspect that I should have forgone building a second settler settler and just have a stream of jags coming out and heading down the road to where ever the nearest neighbour was found. But to have the kind of combat successes you seem to have - I have yet to see more than 6 GL's in the last 6 months of playing (at about 1 game every 7 to 10 days). And that was constantly being at war with most of the neighbours until about 1000 AD in most cases. The best results were with the Japanese, when I got two out of a world war situation, both from samurai. Domo arigato.

One thing that really cramped production for the Aztecs was the need for a temple off the start: I was getting rioting before I could finish a temple in any city I setup. Score one more reason for pop rushing everything.

Armed with the wisdom you have imparted, I will attempt to unleash the jaguar on an unsuspecting world...


D.