My Conversion to the Dark Side.

[Arrian]

Imperialism for me please

-Arrian

[Bella Hella]

i find myself pondering the dark side a lot. i tend to build, and then amass a strong military in the industrial era and do tank/infantry rushes. (oh when the tanks... come rolling in.... oh when the tanks come rolling in....) but the awesome power of early warmongering cannot be denied.

[Harovan]

Originally posted by Theseus
You are right of course... the best warmongering comes from the best building.

That's very true. And I must say, post 1.29f I slowly begin to turn back a bit in the builder direction.

I don't need warmongering much (except in the ancient age), because own research is a viable option again. I fight wars if I need space to breathe or to eliminate a potential treat (like Bismarck in the neighborhood), but I don't fight big wars of overseas conquest anymore. On huge, crowded maps (my current favorite), this generates just completely corrupt areas, which I can't be arsed to micromanage . And I don't fight wars anymore just to generate leaders. With a good infrastructure and terrain improvement, up to Emperor, at least one ancient wonder (Pyramids or GL), half or more medieval wonders and all industrial/modern wonders can be built. I use to punish sneak attacks with taking away 1 or 2 overseas luxury cities, that's it. But calling me a warmonger would be wrong. I'm something in the middle. Call me a pragmatic player, that should fit it best.

[Catt]

Originally posted by Sir Ralph


And I must say, post 1.29f I slowly begin to turn back a bit in the builder direction.

I don't need warmongering much (except in the ancient age), because own research is a viable option again. I fight wars if I need space to breathe or to eliminate a potential treat (like Bismarck in the neighborhood), but I don't fight big wars of overseas conquest anymore. On huge, crowded maps (my current favorite), this generates just completely corrupt areas, which I can't be arsed to micromanage . And I don't fight wars anymore just to generate leaders. With a good infrastructure and terrain improvement, up to Emperor, at least one ancient wonder (Pyramids or GL), half or more medieval wonders and all industrial/modern wonders can be built. I use to punish sneak attacks with taking away 1 or 2 overseas luxury cities, that's it. But calling me a warmonger would be wrong. I'm something in the middle. Call me a pragmatic player, that should fit it best.

My current playstyle has very much evolved ionto something similar. I make war (if needed) in order to secure sufficient land and resources, both luxury and strategic, and I make war for strategic reasons -- capturing and holding powerful and defensible geographic locations, crippling a too-strong neighbor -- but I'm finding with 1.29f that I make war less frequently. 1.29f seems to have helped in offering strategic alternatives in gameplay, which makes each game a little bit more interesting for me.

'Course, I never really went over to the dark side to the extent of some of our Strat Forum regulars. And this was a playstyle I tried to use before - it was just a little bit more challenging on the higher levels with research so difficult before 1.29f.

Notyoueither coined a phrase I like to use - I'm a buildmonger -- builder at heart but not timid about making war when circumstances warrant.

Catt

[Theseus]

Then make me a warbuilder... I STILL romp the AI civs' butts on a regular basis, whether for lebensraum, techs, luxuries, GLs, trimming, or just on principle.

I just don;t believe in a mono-focus on war, nor do I like the simplistic games where rushing is the primary focus.

I believe that 1) a balanced game is the most fun (which includes keeping AI civs off-balance!), and that 2) warmongering *capabilities* come from having a well-developed and healthy empire.

[Arrian]

I played a couple of builder or buildmonger type games right after 1.29 came out, messing around with France, America and Rome. One of the French games was pretty darn peaceful, but partway through I made the mistake of trying to prop up a civ that was getting killed. The trade route got cut, and I became a deal-breaker. That annoyed me. I was winning anyway, but at that point I pretty much had to switch over to agression.

And then the power of the Dark Side called to me, and it was back to my warrior ways. Though technically, I could argue that my Egyptian game (I think I posted about it - the one where I had a perfect FP really early) was not a warmonger game. I was attacked by England, the Iroquois and Russia (alliances with England) first. I responded. Later, I finished them off. I was later attacked by the Aztecs and Chinese. I responded. Finally, Greece attacked me. Game Over. Now it's true that I had every intention of fighting whether I was attacked or not, but I never drew first blood. But like I said, technically

-Arrian

[Catt]

Originally posted by Theseus
Then make me a warbuilder... I STILL romp the AI civs' butts on a regular basis, whether for lebensraum, techs, luxuries, GLs, trimming, or just on principle.

I would expect no less .

Originally posted by Arrian
And then the power of the Dark Side called to me, and it was back to my warrior ways. Though technically, I could argue that my Egyptian game (I think I posted about it - the one where I had a perfect FP really early) was not a warmonger game. I was attacked by England, the Iroquois and Russia (alliances with England) first. I responded. Later, I finished them off. I was later attacked by the Aztecs and Chinese. I responded. Finally, Greece attacked me. Game Over. Now it's true that I had every intention of fighting whether I was attacked or not, but I never drew first blood. But like I said, technically

Again, I would expect no less .

Even while I say I play a more "builder-ish" game than some, I can almost always count on a strategic imperative for a war of aggression, and I can always count on an AI trying to start trouble -- in such circumstances swift and intense punishment is generallly called for

Catt

[Theseus]

Arrian, what I did last night with the Japanese save you posted should be illustrative of my thinking.

The start is SO AWESOMELY powerful, that, unusually, I found myself in the lead almost from the start... more towns, ahead by 1-5 techs...

India, however, started getting a little uppity. Only one tech and one town behind me, I felt that Gandhi had to be shown who's boss. WHACK!! There's a little trim job for you, Elephant Man!

What's this? Shaka settled MY luxury patch to the west (well, he didn;t know it was MINE, but hey, what are you gonna do)... WHACK!!

Jesus, what now... Jerxes build a city near IRON!! Can;t have that. WHACK!!

WHACK!! WHACK!! WHACK!!

(but building temples, markets, etc., all along)

I don;t know if it's the Dark Side... I like to show my friends and neighbors the "light."

[Dalai Lama]

I`m a builder who is slowly but gradually "turning to the dark side" too... But i have 1 big issue: after a couple conquests, how do you warmongers cope with the immense amount of corruption and waste in your enormous empires??? Those conquered cities, especially in empires distant form my home continent, are of absolutely no use.

Palace shifts, governments,...???


Tell me and then I will be part of the Dark side once and for all...

[Theseus]

Palace, many luxuries, adding my own pop via workers and settlers, harbors / airports, happiness buildings and GWs, marketplaces, WLTKD, courthouses, police stations.

Maybe Monarchy for the MPs, but by that time I would usually rather be in Republic or Democracy.

[Zero]

no builders at heart should treated as warmongers just because they start the aggression first. Builders don't have to be peace loving AI is my brothers type of a guy. Good player ceases all the opportunity that is given, and if a builder is presented with those chance, they should go for it. What determines a warmonger VS builder would be this question: Say that you have enough units to fuel your current campaign. And you have basic necessities of aqueduct, temple and library and city moderately developed. Wats your next queue gonna be? More units to overrun? more wealth, workers, buildings?

[Dalai Lama]

Originally posted by Calc II
Good player ceases all the opportunity that is given, and if a builder is presented with those chance, they should go for it.

That`s very true, and I`m not saying that I didn`t start wars in my building times, but I used what I call "the scavenge tactic"... When one of my neighbours is losing a war, mostly when they`re up against multiple opponents, I start pumping out some attacking and of course some defensive units (10 knights, 5-10 longbowmen and 7 or 8 musketmen for example) and take whatever I can, before the empire is totally defeated. I mostly can get 5 cities with no great losses, no foreign nationals, and relatively close to my capitol.

[Arrian]

CalcII,

That type of question is where my "builder" beginnings shine through. If a city improvement is available, I cannot resist it. I actually like falling behind in tech early while I build my army because if I wasn't behind in tech, I'd be building other things and never get around to building the army! I know I need another horseman, but I WANT that library!

I often find myself running low on troops in the late ancient age and again in the late medieval age. This is where having a good Palace/FP setup is crucial. Obviously, the secondary core of my empire gets a later start than my original core, and thus is behind in improvements. I often find myself "building" in the secondary core, and pumping out troops from the original. The improvement I have found I can resist is the colosseum. I'll eventually build them, of course, but I can hold off for a while and build some more troops to keep the momentum going my way.

-Arrian

p.s. Dalai Lama (going to war? LOL) I would humbly suggest that building longbowmen is almost always a waste of shields. They really are a crappy unit, and they cannot be upgraded. I have used them in a pinch a handfull of times, but if you can build knights... build knights.

[Dalai Lama]

Yeah, I agree, Longbowmen suck, but in most games I need an army quick, because until that point I didn't have any military. So in cities that take too long to build knights, I build those cheap longbowmen... As secondary attack untis, they get the job done