DerWille's EitB Thread

[DerWille]

I'm pretty sure this is the place for general EitB talk, and Furball's Civ4 thread inspired me to just put all my thoughts in one thread, because there doesn't seem to be a lot of FFH EitB action going on. I've been on a Civ4 kick lately, remembered how awesome FFH2 was, and decided to pick it up again. I'm using the EitB v12, and I like most of the changes, especially incorporating the better AI mod. A lot of cool strategy games suffer from the computer being unable to play them. Endless Legend had that problem when I picked it up for a bit, hopefully they fixed it.

Map Configuration
I typically play on Large Pangaea/Fractal/Big_and_Small maps with an AI removed on Monarch difficulty at standard speed. I have aggressive AI, no vassal states, no tech trading/brokering, and no Acheon ticked as options. I've been thinking of ticking the difficulty up a bit.

 I actually prefer small maps, but I don't think the AI can play them well. I'll talk more about it in a bit, but getting a good start in FFH2 seems to be more important than in BTS Civ4. Since settlers are so expensive, it's easy to fall behind in the land grab. On a small map, REXing can be enough to choke several AI to a couple cities, and then the game is over on turn 110.

 Likewise, I like Acheon as a mechanic, but the AI cannot deal with him. He chokes nearby AI to a handful of cities that I can pick off.

 Although, from a few test games, it seems like the AI does a lot better on maps where there's more room to expand. Even if I REX, I can't choke the AI out, because there's too much territory to grab. They will eventually get some cities and a game will develop beyond bronze weapon warriors.

Thoughts on Staring Locations and Early Worker Techs
 In other words, unless you're an elf, get out the fucking forest. Seriously, forests are a blight in the early game, but the super settler makes up for it. I've noticed that in the games I've played, the best thing I can do early is move my super settler to a nearby hill and see what's out there. Forest chops are inefficient and teching to mining delays expansion too much. I've done better in games where I've spent 3 to 5 turns moving my settler to a nice river valley than settling in the middle of a forest. Forests are practically unworkable for the first 50 turns of the game.

 Actually, even then, revolting agrarianism and spamming farms on river grassland/floodplains appears faster than mines for building settlers and workers. The farms allow the capitals to grow fast to work more farms which translates into more production sooner. And really, that's why the forests are so bad. The capital stagnates, and they provide too much defensive cover for barbarians.

 Has anyone else that experience or am I just approaching forest starts wrong?

Early Tech Choices and Bronze Warriors
I've been trying to do different opening tech builds, but I always keep coming back to this one:

Agriculture -> Calendar -> Exploration -> Crafting -> Mining -> (Ancient Chants) -> Bronze Working/Carnivals

 I only take ancient chants if I'm not playing a creative leader, and I grab bronze working before carnivals if I have copper or jungle that needs to be chopped. If I do, I grab carnivals next for markets to offset maintenance costs. Afterward, I'll think about grabbing animal husbandry and hunting if I have those resources to hook up, but part of me thinks I should go for education/code of laws or mysticism for apprenticeship/aristocracy/god king before them.

 That's something I've been wondering, how soon should I go for aristocracy? God king feels like it'd be worthwhile for producing warriors/infrastructure, but the production doesn't apply to food, right? So taking it early wouldn't help me push out more settlers/workers.

 My first war always seems to end up being a bronze warrior/axeman attack on the AI who settled next to me. I'd like to try using early recon/religious/mage/mounted units instead, but all of those seem inefficient compared to bronze warriors. They don't require me to research any non-economic techs and cost fewer hammers. I can simply overwhelm the AI with numbers that are 25% stronger theirs. If their defenses are especially strong, apprenticeship bronze axes are usually enough to crack the top defender and clean up. More so if the civ has an ability or spell I can use early like Grigori adventurers or Hippus's world spell.

 Has this been your guys' experiences or am I just doing it wrong?

Recon Units
 Speaking of doing it wrong, I don't get how to use recon units. Do you build them early? Hunters have the ability to capture animals and what not, but the penalty to city attacks makes me question if they'd be of any use. Are they more like a supplement to an early army? The only advantage they seem to have over bronze warriors is that they have 2 moves. Are they meant to be a replacement for people who don't start with copper nearby?

 Even later into the game, the recon techs seem lackluster compared to the metal ones. Metal brings stronger units and better production. They reveal resources for better tile yields, strengthen existing units, make workshops better, and grant forges for more production/happiness. Off the top of my head, the recon techs give hunting lodges and that's it. Feels like everything related to the recon line is less bang for my time. Am I thinking of this the wrong way?

[Qgqqqqq]

Hi DerWille, glad to see EitB still attracting interest. To respond quickly to your questions (if you want a more longform discussion, happy to engage when I have more time):

Yes, forest starts suck. They're not designed around FFH, and if you look at PBEM maps here, you'll see most have far less than in the natural maps.

You don't need to go for aristocracy in EitB. That said, when I do it's normally around 5+ cities. The anarchy and Mysticism requirement often means I never hit Godking beforehand.

As a more general point, most infrastructure isn't worthwhile in FFH.

Define "doing it wrong". I generally play at Immortal/Deity, and often use other mods (with better AIs), so a bronze war of aggression is rarely an option - though I frequently have to defend in this period. But yes, bronze warriors remain efficient, especially against AIs, for an absurd amount of time.

Recon units strength is more prominent in MP, and comes primarily from the fact that there are no promotions that can attack against them, so they have an advantage against mono-unit armies, even in cities. Mobility also matters far more against humans than AI. Against archer-heavy AI's who hole up in a city, this is far less effective.

I do think you're overstating the advantages of metal, especially as they sometimes aren't around, forges are expensive, and it takes a long time for workshops to be worthwhile.

[Mardoc]

I'm pretty sure this is the place for general EitB talk, and Furball's Civ4 thread inspired me to just put all my thoughts in one thread, because there doesn't seem to be a lot of FFH EitB action going on.

Yeah, unfortunately we seem to have dropped below critical mass to keep games going - although you never know, maybe there are more lurkers than I think.  EitB is still my favorite mod - it's just I usually haven't had the time for any civ at all lately.

 I actually prefer small maps, but I don't think the AI can play them well. I'll talk more about it in a bit, but getting a good start in FFH2 seems to be more important than in BTS Civ4. Since settlers are so expensive, it's easy to fall behind in the land grab. On a small map, REXing can be enough to choke several AI to a couple cities, and then the game is over on turn 110.

I think this is largely a function of the difficulty level you play on.  Once the AI starts getting production boosts, and especially if it gets free settlers, it's more competitive, at least early.  

Thoughts on Staring Locations and Early Worker Techs
 In other words, unless you're an elf, get out the fucking forest.

...
And really, that's why the forests are so bad. The capital stagnates, and they provide too much defensive cover for barbarians.

 Has anyone else that experience or am I just approaching forest starts wrong?

If you *are* an elf, you still probably don't want your capital completely in forest. Although you can build on it, it slows down your first few improved tiles too much.  Half your BFC in forest is probably ok, though, since eventually you'll want the tree tiles.  And of course in general more land is better, you still eventually want to grab everything even if you have to clearcut it first.

Early Tech Choices and Bronze Warriors
I've been trying to do different opening tech builds, but I always keep coming back to this one:

Agriculture -> Calendar -> Exploration -> Crafting -> Mining -> (Ancient Chants) -> Bronze Working/Carnivals

 I only take ancient chants if I'm not playing a creative leader, and I grab bronze working before carnivals if I have copper or jungle that needs to be chopped. If I do, I grab carnivals next for markets to offset maintenance costs. Afterward, I'll think about grabbing animal husbandry and hunting if I have those resources to hook up, but part of me thinks I should go for education/code of laws or mysticism for apprenticeship/aristocracy/god king before them.

That's a good default, a bit unfortunately.  This depends a lot on what resources you have at your capital, though, and if you have a river or not; occasionally you need non-farm food.

I don't think I'd rate Carnivals quite as high as you do, at least not as a general rule; 3 gpt/city isn't a ton.  By the time you account for both the commerce to research it and the hammers to put up markets, often you could have reached a more permanent economy with code of laws or education.  Similiarly, Mysticism often gets rated higher; it unlocks the ability to go for a Great Sage, and also it is required for religions which you'll often want for your game plan.  God King can work as a gold stop-gap while you move along to a better econ tech, particularly if you have Elder Councils with Sages for the actual teching while your God King capital works full gold for income.  But really - this is where civ choice often matters.  40 hammer markets/80 hammer councils vs 80 hammer markets / 40 hammer councils can often make that choice for you. 

That's something I've been wondering, how soon should I go for aristocracy? God king feels like it'd be worthwhile for producing warriors/infrastructure, but the production doesn't apply to food, right? So taking it early wouldn't help me push out more settlers/workers.

We tried to rebalance away from aristofarms being the one right choice, but I don't think we really succeeded.  Personally I think aristocracy is the default, but there are special circumstances where you may prefer God King - playing Kuriotates, or if you get a non-standard start, or occasionally as the Lanun where you want to pump out workboats more than workers.  Or if you're Spiritual and racing for a particular wonder/building the Tower.  Actually, the bigger competition is probably Foreign Trade - that got buffed to the point where you may occasionally consider a cottage economy.  Elves and Lanun particularly consider Foreign Trade.

 My first war always seems to end up being a bronze warrior/axeman attack on the AI who settled next to me. I'd like to try using early recon/religious/mage/mounted units instead, but all of those seem inefficient compared to bronze warriors. They don't require me to research any non-economic techs and cost fewer hammers. I can simply overwhelm the AI with numbers that are 25% stronger theirs. If their defenses are especially strong, apprenticeship bronze axes are usually enough to crack the top defender and clean up. More so if the civ has an ability or spell I can use early like Grigori adventurers or Hippus's world spell.

 Has this been your guys' experiences or am I just doing it wrong?

This depends almost entirely on the target.  A bronze rush can absolutely be stopped in MP or on higher difficulties; most trivially, bronze warriors will stop axemen quite hammer-efficiently.  But against someone unprepared, Axes are the easiest way to take advantage.

Recon Units
 Speaking of doing it wrong, I don't get how to use recon units. Do you build them early? Hunters have the ability to capture animals and what not, but the penalty to city attacks makes me question if they'd be of any use. Are they more like a supplement to an early army? The only advantage they seem to have over bronze warriors is that they have 2 moves. Are they meant to be a replacement for people who don't start with copper nearby?

 Even later into the game, the recon techs seem lackluster compared to the metal ones. Metal brings stronger units and better production. They reveal resources for better tile yields, strengthen existing units, make workshops better, and grant forges for more production/happiness. Off the top of my head, the recon techs give hunting lodges and that's it. Feels like everything related to the recon line is less bang for my time. Am I thinking of this the wrong way?

Two angles: Hawks and civ/overall strategy choice.  Hawks aren't quite as vital in SP, but against an MP opponent, you need to have the visibility if you want to wage war successfully.  Either Hawks or Floating Eyes, and Eyes are a lot harder to get if you don't have metamagic mana.

Civ also matters.  If you need Hunting for other reasons, like if you're going for Way of the Forest or you have a lot of deer nearby, Hunters are an adequate defense that can let you skip the metal line.  Not great, but it'll probably keep you alive while you keep teching up to Rangers.  Better to have Rangers than Hunters + Axemen, that's for sure.  Also, if you're Sidar, you definitely want to unlock the Divided Souls.

And...against humans, mobility matters a lot more.  Recon will always be faster than metal, which can give you opportunities.  Also, if you're blatant about it, humans will pick up Rust on their adepts and that definitely makes other lines more competitive with metal.

But you can definitely go the metal route if you have a situation that benefits from that approach.  And it's probably also the default, and more effective against AI's than against humans.

In terms of late game - nothing at all can contend with mages, honestly.  Metal units can be a good supplement, or stack defense; horsemen might accomplish something by going around the enemy, but the only solutions to mages are to get there first or to kill the opponent before they accumulate critical mass.  Although - this might also be a MP perspective, since the AI doesn't really have a good idea how to handle the magic system.

[DerWille]

Thanks for the replies Qgqqqqq and Mardoc.

Qgqqqqq wrote:
Hi DerWille, glad to see EitB still attracting interest. To respond quickly to your questions (if you want a more longform discussion, happy to engage when I have more time):

Yes, forest starts suck. They're not designed around FFH, and if you look at PBEM maps here, you'll see most have far less than in the natural maps.

----

Define "doing it wrong". I generally play at Immortal/Deity, and often use other mods (with better AIs), so a bronze war of aggression is rarely an option - though I frequently have to defend in this period. But yes, bronze warriors remain efficient, especially against AIs, for an absurd amount of time.

 Thanks for working on the EitB mod. It really improves the base mod, especially with the AI improvement mod integrated. It really helps make the game better. I shy away from most modmods, because FFH already has lots of "stuff" in it. I want the stuff that's already there to be used better, not more of it.

 Unfortunately, I can't really follow the PBEM games, because 95% of the screenshots are gone. I've tried reading the text, but without the images, it's hard to follow.

 About the forest starts though, has anyone tried moving forest chopping to crafting instead? Chopping is weak compared to BTS Civ4, so I don't think the extra production will amount to too much more than an extra warrior or a slightly faster worker.However, I'm willing to bet real world testing proves me wrong on that.

 What I meant by doing it wrong is that I'm failing to use the technology to grow my civilization as fast as other choices, especially the metal line. I see a lot of modern strategy games like Civ, FFH, DotA, SC, etc. as games where each player is pushing a snowball down a mountain. The winner of these games is the player who can grow their snowball to critical mass faster than everyone else.

 I kept bringing up bronze warriors/axemen, because it seems to be best early play if there's copper nearby. Get bronze working to expand into the jungle and bum rush the civ next to me who doesn't have it. From what you and Mardoc have written, this seems to be where the recon and archery lines shine. Use the visibility of hawks, the movement of hunters, and the higher base strengths to match hammer efficiency to hold on until you reach something to turn the situation around, for example, adepts or religious units.

Qgqqqqq wrote:

As a more general point, most infrastructure isn't worthwhile in FFH.

---

I do think you're overstating the advantages of metal, especially as they sometimes aren't around, forges are expensive, and it takes a long time for workshops to be worthwhile.

 I've had a hunch about this. Part of me feels like I'm trying to play BTS Civ4 style game when FFH isn't designed for that. I can't remember who said it, but they likened a lot of the factions in FFH to Byzantine Cataphract beelines. They're going to do X, and if you let them get there, you're dead.

 I'm also finding that infrastructure might not be worthwhile as well. Forges are expensive and do come late, but workshops hit their peak at smelting right? That's just a tech or so away from bronze working, right? If I'm running an astrogaraianism, it seems like I end up farming everything to run specialists or farming green tiles, workshopping brown tiles, and mining hills.

 Most infrastructure I end up building seems to be health and happiness. Happiness early on, but later healthiness. It's so hard to keep my cities healthy.

 And, I think you're right, I may be overestimating the metal line, but it's always seems to win me the game in the early and mid-game.

Mardoc wrote:

I don't think I'd rate Carnivals quite as high as you do, at least not as a general rule; 3 gpt/city isn't a ton.  By the time you account for both the commerce to research it and the hammers to put up markets, often you could have reached a more permanent economy with code of laws or education.  Similiarly, Mysticism often gets rated higher; it unlocks the ability to go for a Great Sage, and also it is required for religions which you'll often want for your game plan.  God King can work as a gold stop-gap while you move along to a better econ tech, particularly if you have Elder Councils with Sages for the actual teching while your God King capital works full gold for income.  But really - this is where civ choice often matters.  40 hammer markets/80 hammer councils vs 80 hammer markets / 40 hammer councils can often make that choice for you.

 I hadn't thought about the trade off with hammers for markets vs elder councils. That's a fair point. My love for markets came from noticing that in the early game, +3 wealth was usually enough offset the maintenance costs of the city so I could keep the slider at 100%. If that wasn't enough, running merchant specialists too would do it, so I could continue grabbing land.

 Also, I hadn't thought about using god king with 0% slider and using mass elder councils/libraries to do the actual teching. I like that idea, especially if I'm planning on a cottage economy with a philosophical leader. It doesn't take too long for a cottage to equal an aristofarm in commerce and then surpass it. I'll try that out after I finish this current game.

Murdoc wrote:

We tried to rebalance away from aristofarms being the one right choice, but I don't think we really succeeded.  Personally I think aristocracy is the default, but there are special circumstances where you may prefer God King - playing Kuriotates, or if you get a non-standard start, or occasionally as the Lanun where you want to pump out workboats more than workers.  Or if you're Spiritual and racing for a particular wonder/building the Tower.  Actually, the bigger competition is probably Foreign Trade - that got buffed to the point where you may occasionally consider a cottage economy.  Elves and Lanun particularly consider Foreign Trade.

 I was thinking about why it's so good, and I think it's a combination of the commerce boost and maintenance reduction at just the right time that can put the player into a game winning position before it peters out to other strategies. I don't have the game open right now, but if I remember right, aristocracy comes with -40% maintenance and lets you build courthouses for another -50%. The two combined provide -90% maintenance right when the player is hitting 5+ cities, and it's becoming an issue. Also, since farms are so efficient for growing cities and building workers/settlers, it's essentially "free" commerce with a click.

 I have an unhealthy obsession with cultural victories so I tried out cottage + bard culture vs aristofarm + bard culture to see which one did better. The cottage culture ended out producing the aristofarms significantly. I believe the cottages got up to 750 culture per turn while the aristofarms capped out around 450~500. That suggests that cottages do outperform, but they take significantly longer to get there. The question is whether or not the game is still up for grabs by then.

Murdoc wrote:

Two angles: Hawks and civ/overall strategy choice.  Hawks aren't quite as vital in SP, but against an MP opponent, you need to have the visibility if you want to wage war successfully.  Either Hawks or Floating Eyes, and Eyes are a lot harder to get if you don't have metamagic mana.

Civ also matters.  If you need Hunting for other reasons, like if you're going for Way of the Forest or you have a lot of deer nearby, Hunters are an adequate defense that can let you skip the metal line.  Not great, but it'll probably keep you alive while you keep teching up to Rangers.  Better to have Rangers than Hunters + Axemen, that's for sure.  Also, if you're Sidar, you definitely want to unlock the Divided Souls.

And...against humans, mobility matters a lot more.  Recon will always be faster than metal, which can give you opportunities.  Also, if you're blatant about it, humans will pick up Rust on their adepts and that definitely makes other lines more competitive with metal.

But you can definitely go the metal route if you have a situation that benefits from that approach.  And it's probably also the default, and more effective against AI's than against humans.

In terms of late game - nothing at all can contend with mages, honestly.  Metal units can be a good supplement, or stack defense; horsemen might accomplish something by going around the enemy, but the only solutions to mages are to get there first or to kill the opponent before they accumulate critical mass.  Although - this might also be a MP perspective, since the AI doesn't really have a good idea how to handle the magic system.

 I've never really played much multiplayer Civ other than with friends back in high school, but from reading various reports, the vision is absolutely critical. My impression is that human vs human games have a lot more battles in the open where each side is trying to attack from the fog and make use of defensive terrain bonuses. In that situation a 2-mover with a penalty to city attack would work great, because by the time you reach the city, most of the defenders are already dead.

 My love for metal is because it gives so many advantages early for such little cost. If you play Magic the Gathering, it's a lot like the color near and dear to my heart, red. Why bother with different strategies when I can end the game on turn 4 by throwing lightning bolts and Jackal Pups at you? Even if the comparison isn't entirely apt, because the game isn't technically over, it feels like it can put me as the runaway player quicker than anything else.

 Also, I 100% agree with you that late-game magic is the best. A stack of 10+ mages flinging fireballs/specters is tough to beat. Just thinking about it in terms of hammers produced each turn with a click of a button is a ridiculous. A player can't produce enough units to compensate (although, I wonder if it's possible to get enough spell resistance from promotions to mostly negate it with extensive use of medic units).

[Mardoc]

----
 About the forest starts though, has anyone tried moving forest chopping to crafting instead? Chopping is weak compared to BTS Civ4, so I don't think the extra production will amount to too much more than an extra warrior or a slightly faster worker.However, I'm willing to bet real world testing proves me wrong on that.

I don't think we tried that.  Probably would be a good idea - it just didn't occur to us because MP maps are generally handcrafted, and no one buries you in forest in a handcrafted map.

 What I meant by doing it wrong is that I'm failing to use the technology to grow my civilization as fast as other choices, especially the metal line. I see a lot of modern strategy games like Civ, FFH, DotA, SC, etc. as games where each player is pushing a snowball down a mountain. The winner of these games is the player who can grow their snowball to critical mass faster than everyone else.

 I kept bringing up bronze warriors/axemen, because it seems to be best early play if there's copper nearby. Get bronze working to expand into the jungle and bum rush the civ next to me who doesn't have it. From what you and Mardoc have written, this seems to be where the recon and archery lines shine. Use the visibility of hawks, the movement of hunters, and the higher base strengths to match hammer efficiency to hold on until you reach something to turn the situation around, for example, adepts or religious units.

Really, it's a metagame thing.  If you and your opponent both get Bronze, then neither of you gets much benefit from it.  Axemen still generally lose to bronze warriors in cities, but cost twice as much - so you can't successfully invade.  Which means you've picked up a mostly-military tech early and failed to get any gains from it.

If you get Bronze and your opponent is focused on economic techs, you might be able to overwhelm them and profit.  But, they do have an extra space of time to research economy first and only swap to military later when they see you're going the military route.  If they have a scout on your border, they can see when you get bronze weapons, and in the time it takes for you to build your training yards, axes, and march to their border, they can usually manage at least bronze warriors to defend with.  Then they've spent time building their snowball while you've been building an army that won't accomplish anything.  They've built their military later, and with a smaller fraction of their total hammer production, which means they should have more cities/more tech/more something that will let them come back from stalemate and beat you - either with numbers or better units.

But...it all depends on how successfully they react to you.  If they don't keep a scout paying attention to you, if they're not watching the Power graph and for metal and you can get your army to their border before they notice, then the military route pays off very well.  Especially if you've got a relevant worldspell or unique unit - Calabim, Hippus, and Doviello are particularly good at this.

 Most infrastructure I end up building seems to be health and happiness. Happiness early on, but later healthiness. It's so hard to keep my cities healthy.

Happiness infra is selectively useful, depending on which building it is.  You can get an awful lot of happiness from resources and religion, and Public baths are often worthwhile.  I don't tend to find other buildings worthwhile but partially I think that's the speed of MP games - usually someone is winning by T150 (quick).

 And, I think you're right, I may be overestimating the metal line, but it's always seems to win me the game in the early and mid-game.

I'm not surprised - I think we're just pointing out that this is probably based partly on the game settings you've chosen.  Once you bump up difficulty, or play on bigger maps, or play against non-AI's, then metal isn't as dominant.  But...part of that is that the AI isn't very good at using mobility and playing reactively, which will be a permanent skew.

 I hadn't thought about the trade off with hammers for markets vs elder councils. That's a fair point. My love for markets came from noticing that in the early game, +3 wealth was usually enough offset the maintenance costs of the city so I could keep the slider at 100%. If that wasn't enough, running merchant specialists too would do it, so I could continue grabbing land.

 Also, I hadn't thought about using god king with 0% slider and using mass elder councils/libraries to do the actual teching. I like that idea, especially if I'm planning on a cottage economy with a philosophical leader. It doesn't take too long for a cottage to equal an aristofarm in commerce and then surpass it. I'll try that out after I finish this current game.

It's situational - but I do think if your slider is at 100%, you're not expanding fast enough .

 I was thinking about why it's so good, and I think it's a combination of the commerce boost and maintenance reduction at just the right time that can put the player into a game winning position before it peters out to other strategies. I don't have the game open right now, but if I remember right, aristocracy comes with -40% maintenance and lets you build courthouses for another -50%. The two combined provide -90% maintenance right when the player is hitting 5+ cities, and it's becoming an issue. Also, since farms are so efficient for growing cities and building workers/settlers, it's essentially "free" commerce with a click.

That's what it is in Base FFH.  I'm pretty sure we knocked it down to -20% maintenance, and courthouses are 40% which multiplies rather than adding.  Still cuts maintenance in half, and still gives you insta-commerce from tiles, which makes it still a very good move even if not always dominant.  This is the real kicker, though:

The question is whether or not the game is still up for grabs by then.

Quite often, if you can get ahead by a tier in units, you should be able to win the game from there.  The strength boosts are just too dramatic to overcome otherwise.  Although, again, that may be a bias from our typical game settings - we tended to play PBEMs where there are only 5 civs, for logistical reasons.  That definitely biases the game toward the early portion; I bet bigger games or games against Diety AI's force you to consider the long game.

 I've never really played much multiplayer Civ other than with friends back in high school, but from reading various reports, the vision is absolutely critical. My impression is that human vs human games have a lot more battles in the open where each side is trying to attack from the fog and make use of defensive terrain bonuses. In that situation a 2-mover with a penalty to city attack would work great, because by the time you reach the city, most of the defenders are already dead.

Well...sort of.  The bigger effect, though, is the assumption you're embodying with 'the city'.  A stack of fast movers can fork several cities, usually, while metal defenders are in one spot.  Either you have to build enough units to defend, say, three cities against one army - or you have to attack out at the invaders when they fork you.  Generally attacking out is easier than defending everywhere, and it's certainly better than losing all your peripheral cities.

 My love for metal is because it gives so many advantages early for such little cost. If you play Magic the Gathering, it's a lot like the color near and dear to my heart, red. Why bother with different strategies when I can end the game on turn 4 by throwing lightning bolts and Jackal Pups at you? Even if the comparison isn't entirely apt, because the game isn't technically over, it feels like it can put me as the runaway player quicker than anything else.

It can...if it works.  It can also put you behind if your target defends successfully.  I personally don't tend to like high-variance strategies but I can see how other people would disagree.

If that's the playstyle you like, don't let me be a party pooper, though!   I'll suggest a few variations on the theme that you might like to try:
- Kuriotate Centaur rush.  They look like a peaceful civ, but they can generally get one of the earliest conquering armies built.  It's all about throwing down your core cities quickly, and racing up to Horseback Riding, to build a bunch of Centaurs.  They don't require a building, and Kurio cities early game will be very productive
- Clan For the Horde Rush.  You can hit someone with an insta-army that you didn't even have to build, while your core focuses on growing and getting Warrens built.  Their economic penalties hurt, though, and timing For the Horde is annoying.

For bonus points, try this once with Acheron enabled. You'll get Sons of the Inferno from his city, and as a Barbarian you can retrieve them safely.
- Calabim Moroi attack.  All the benefits of the axe rush, except that you get Moroi instead of axes, and you unlock Governor's Manors to multiply your hammers in the event your rush doesn't win the game on its own
- Ljosalfar tree attack.  Race to Way of the Forest, get out a settler, plop him in a forest on your opponent's border, pop the worldspell.  Your treants only last a few turns, but you can wreck face until they root.
- Hippus horsemen attack.  Best with Tasunke.  Build your empire normally while teching to Horseback Riding.  Build one Stables, and scouts from your other cities.  When the stables completes, make sure to have gold on hand.  Mass upgrade your scouts to horsemen, use the worldspell, and you've suddenly got an army of Str 5, move 5 horsemen who can raze a good chunk of the world to the ground.  By pillaging a bunch you can keep your economy from imploding too badly in the process.
- Keelyn's puppets of doom.  Tech up to Knowledge of the Ether, build a bunch of adepts, take Summon Skeleton on all of them.  Attack your foes.  Not much can stand up to a continuously regenerating horde of skeletons - and puppets let you replace lost skeletons on the battlefield without risking your adepts to do it.
- Illian Priest of Winter rush.  Build your civ normally, except make Philosophy your early target, and build the White Hand.  Three strong priests, each of whom can summon Ice Elementals, can wreck someone's day.  It's generally straightforward to have Str 7 priests with Combat V, summoning Str 5 elementals (wiht Empower V).  In an era where your best opponent might have Str. 5 defenders.
- Infernal Rush.  Take the Lanun, Luchiurp, or Kuriotates.  Focus everything on teching to Infernal Pact, and swap to Hyborem.  All the better if your original civ has no real defenses and becomes your first conquest.  Hyborem plays a lot differently, but definitely rewards aggression.  He gets Iron for free - this is mostly a metal strategy but turned up to 11.
- Luchiurp Wood Golems.  Use the worldspell early, and the golden hammer courier trick to put all hammers in one city.  Combine their natural talent with a couple Engineer bulbs, to get to Construction ASAP.  Build a bunch of Wood Golems, and have Barnaxus farm XP for promotions.  This adds up to units who can be built at Str 6, +50% strength from Empower promotions, while everyone else is maybe as far as axemen (and probably not).
- Sheaim Pyre Zombie rush - again basically an axe rush except with the benefit of a unique unit who's awesome.
- Svartalfar scout rush.  They start out at Str 3 on the attack, with 2 moves.  Just a little XP gathering gives them Shock, at which point they dominate warriors, and you can build them from the beginning of the game.  Can't capture cities pre-Shock, but they can choke someone and they can certainly capture cities once you get some promotions going.
Finally, the Doviello are probably the best pure axe rush civ in the game.  Build a bunch of warriors, upgrade them the instant you get Bronze working (for cheap), move to your foe, add in the wolves from the worldspell and have fun!  Bonus points if you used your hero to choke someone before they even got their first settler built.

A player can't produce enough units to compensate (although, I wonder if it's possible to get enough spell resistance from promotions to mostly negate it with extensive use of medic units).

In practice - no, not really.  Mostly because you can't generally get enough spell resistance on enough units; pretty much only heroes get that much XP, and killing one unit is just a matter of throwing enough summons at it.  Medics don't tend to help, because if I can't kill at least some of your units on my turn, I shouldn't attack at all until I've reinforced or you've split up.

[Qgqqqqq]

We tried to rebalance away from aristofarms being the one right choice, but I don't think we really succeeded.  Personally I think aristocracy is the default, but there are special circumstances where you may prefer God King - playing Kuriotates, or if you get a non-standard start, or occasionally as the Lanun where you want to pump out workboats more than workers.  Or if you're Spiritual and racing for a particular wonder/building the Tower.  Actually, the bigger competition is probably Foreign Trade - that got buffed to the point where you may occasionally consider a cottage economy.  Elves and Lanun particularly consider Foreign Trade.

I actually think the latest patch has Foreign Trade overpowered (with trade routes), and I've thought they were closely balanced for a while. But there haven't been a ton of games to check, and there's definitely room for different opinions still.

Unfortunately, I can't really follow the PBEM games, because 95% of the screenshots are gone. I've tried reading the text, but without the images, it's hard to follow.

Yeah, this is a big tragedy, mostly caused by dropbox removing support for public sharing. 

I'm also finding that infrastructure might not be worthwhile as well. Forges are expensive and do come late, but workshops hit their peak at smelting right? That's just a tech or so away from bronze working, right? If I'm running an astrogaraianism, it seems like I end up farming everything to run specialists or farming green tiles, workshopping brown tiles, and mining hills.

Guilds, actually. At smelting they're meh-tier. 

Most infrastructure I end up building seems to be health and happiness. Happiness early on, but later healthiness. It's so hard to keep my cities healthy.

Your cities don't need to be healthy, so long as they aren't starving. Sounds harsh, but it works, and saves a lot of hammers.

Also, I hadn't thought about using god king with 0% slider and using mass elder councils/libraries to do the actual teching. I like that idea, especially if I'm planning on a cottage economy with a philosophical leader. It doesn't take too long for a cottage to equal an aristofarm in commerce and then surpass it. I'll try that out after I finish this current game.

Elder councils probably won't be enough to power all your tech, and Godking only effects one city, so it's quickly inferior to city states - and easily so, if you have enough EC to tech places. But going 0% when in GK can definitely be worth it to bank up for later.

I have an unhealthy obsession with cultural victories so I tried out cottage + bard culture vs aristofarm + bard culture to see which one did better. The cottage culture ended out producing the aristofarms significantly. I believe the cottages got up to 750 culture per turn while the aristofarms capped out around 450~500. That suggests that cottages do outperform, but they take significantly longer to get there. The question is whether or not the game is still up for grabs by then.

The thing to remember with culture victories is it's the % modifiers that matter - so you want a lot of different religions and temples. I do think that bards are pretty good - but you don't need aristofarms for that. The idea is to use full food farms to power the culture creation - after all, culture slider will output a ton from other, non-main cities.

Now I'm missing the cultural domination SG we ran, and wanting to try that again. Such fun. 

Here's the link to my screenshots from that game, if you want to take a gander. The game itself is in the SG menu, here.

For bonus points, try this once with Acheron enabled. You'll get Sons of the Inferno from his city, and as a Barbarian you can retrieve them safely.

Pretty sure Sareln fixed that before my time.

[Brian Shanahan]

We could always put together a new SG team.

[Mardoc]

Yeah, this is a big tragedy, mostly caused by dropbox removing support for public sharing. 

As I understand it, they didn't remove support, they just changed the method and the format of the links.  Can still use Dropbox, but it would be a huge project to go back to my old reports and update all my links.  Plus now they've demonstrated they'll change the format, how do I know they won't do it again?

Elder councils probably won't be enough to power all your tech, and Godking only effects one city, so it's quickly inferior to city states - and easily so, if you have enough EC to tech places. But going 0% when in GK can definitely be worth it to bank up for later.

I think we're talking about using them in lieu of Markets to help with the initial Palace + river push to get to a real economic tech like Education, not in lieu of all economy whatsoever. Agreed that you can't lean on them forever.

Pretty sure Sareln fixed that before my time.

Oh, right.  I guess that was inevitable when I abused it to conquer him...

We could always put together a new SG team.

I would at least be game to stand on the sidelines with pom-poms.  Might manage to find the time to play some too.

[DerWille]

Murdoc wrote:

Really, it's a metagame thing.  If you and your opponent both get Bronze, then neither of you gets much benefit from it.  Axemen still generally lose to bronze warriors in cities, but cost twice as much - so you can't successfully invade.  Which means you've picked up a mostly-military tech early and failed to get any gains from it.

If you get Bronze and your opponent is focused on economic techs, you might be able to overwhelm them and profit.  But, they do have an extra space of time to research economy first and only swap to military later when they see you're going the military route.  If they have a scout on your border, they can see when you get bronze weapons, and in the time it takes for you to build your training yards, axes, and march to their border, they can usually manage at least bronze warriors to defend with.  Then they've spent time building their snowball while you've been building an army that won't accomplish anything.  They've built their military later, and with a smaller fraction of their total hammer production, which means they should have more cities/more tech/more something that will let them come back from stalemate and beat you - either with numbers or better units.

But...it all depends on how successfully they react to you.  If they don't keep a scout paying attention to you, if they're not watching the Power graph and for metal and you can get your army to their border before they notice, then the military route pays off very well.  Especially if you've got a relevant worldspell or unique unit - Calabim, Hippus, and Doviello are particularly good at this.

 I 100% agree that bronze attacking someone who already has bronze is a waste of time. 

I don't consider it a pure military tech either. The other big thing is that it lets you cut down jungle. Freeing calendar resources and land is an economic benefit. Also, I'm assuming that everyone revolts to nationhood in the beginning of the game, because there's no religion to follow and pacifism seems like a terrible philosophy when orcish vikings are knocking on your sole city's doors. The training yard nets that +1 happiness while improving your defenses (+2 with Balseraphs which I've been playing a lot of lately).

Murdoc wrote:

Happiness infra is selectively useful, depending on which building it is.  You can get an awful lot of happiness from resources and religion, and Public baths are often worthwhile.  I don't tend to find other buildings worthwhile but partially I think that's the speed of MP games - usually someone is winning by T150 (quick).

Yeah, I can see how that's the case. From what I've read of the reports, it seems like someone gets into a dominant position and everyone else concedes.

Murdoc wrote:
I'm not surprised - I think we're just pointing out that this is probably based partly on the game settings you've chosen.  Once you bump up difficulty, or play on bigger maps, or play against non-AI's, then metal isn't as dominant.  But...part of that is that the AI isn't very good at using mobility and playing reactively, which will be a permanent skew.

 Most definitely. I'm already seeing it on the large map I'm playing now. There's 3 civs that are ahead, Sheeba, Luchirp, and myself as the evil clowns. Sheeba has been the main rival and declared war on me, but didn't do anything for 20 or 30 turns because she already in a bunch of wars. Anyway, I took a city, and she's got a stack parked outside of it with at least 100 units. I keep throwing 20 fireballs at it a turn, but it's not enough.

 I ended up taking another civ out with metal (they declared on me this time!), but it didn't win me the game, because it didn't win me a third of the world's territory because of map size.

Murdoc wrote:

It can...if it works.  It can also put you behind if your target defends successfully.  I personally don't tend to like high-variance strategies but I can see how other people would disagree.

If that's the playstyle you like, don't let me be a party pooper, though!

 It's not so much that I'm in love with rushing. It's more like, why do anything else when it's so efficient (against the AI)?

 To continue using the Magic example, when a format first comes out, usually aggro decks do well, because no one really understands the card interactions yet. Just killing the other guy fast enough is good enough. Then a midrange deck arises that can survive the aggression, and finish the game with a big threat the aggro deck can't deal with. However, by then enough of the format will be understood that a control can arise, because it preys on the slower midrange decks while understanding what threats it needs to deal with. However, that slowness makes it vulnerable to aggro and the meta cycles.

 It's like you said, the AI doesn't know how to play reactive, so the midrange deck never comes.

Murdoc wrote:

- Hippus horsemen attack.  Best with Tasunke.  Build your empire normally while teching to Horseback Riding.  Build one Stables, and scouts from your other cities.  When the stables completes, make sure to have gold on hand.  Mass upgrade your scouts to horsemen, use the worldspell, and you've suddenly got an army of Str 5, move 5 horsemen who can raze a good chunk of the world to the ground.  By pillaging a bunch you can keep your economy from imploding too badly in the process.
...
- Svartalfar scout rush.  They start out at Str 3 on the attack, with 2 moves.  Just a little XP gathering gives them Shock, at which point they dominate warriors, and you can build them from the beginning of the game.  Can't capture cities pre-Shock, but they can choke someone and they can certainly capture cities once you get some promotions going.

 I did not know scouts could promote to horsemen. That's interesting. Sorta want to try that out. Same with the elf scouts. The elf scout rush seems like it'd be really good with Volanna.

Qgqqqqq wrote:

I actually think the latest patch has Foreign Trade overpowered (with trade routes), and I've thought they were closely balanced for a while. But there haven't been a ton of games to check, and there's definitely room for different opinions still.

 It's felt pretty good to me so far. I think it needs to be stronger than aristocracy, because it comes later and the cottages need more time to develop. Aristoagararianism is good for a huge spike now, but it comes at the cost of potential later. I think that's a good strategic trade off.

Qgqqqqq wrote:

The thing to remember with culture victories is it's the % modifiers that matter - so you want a lot of different religions and temples. I do think that bards are pretty good - but you don't need aristofarms for that. The idea is to use full food farms to power the culture creation - after all, culture slider will output a ton from other, non-main cities.

Now I'm missing the cultural domination SG we ran, and wanting to try that again. Such fun. 

Here's the link to my screenshots from that game, if you want to take a gander. The game itself is in the SG menu, here.

 Thanks for the link. I took a look at it.

 The test wasn't 100% conclusive since I didn't use the same civs (Elohim vs Grigori), but both ran Theater of Dreams/Hall of Kings/Caste System/Liberty and 100% cultural slider. I was curious if the higher food output and the farm commerce was stronger than cottages with a few bards. I was also checking if it was possible to do a Grigori culture bomb by popping their world spell for a bunch of great bards to end the game like the Elohim can use theirs to ensure that they win. It was really easy to get 8~10 great bards in a single turn to culture bomb the home stretch. Grigori culture seems like it has potential as a strategy, but I'd need to practice and refine more.

[Qgqqqqq]

It's Mardoc, not Murdoc.


I hadn't realised it had been 4 years since that SG, sheesh. I'd be up for a new SG, but would need to see the concept.

I don't consider it a pure military tech either. The other big thing is that it lets you cut down jungle. Freeing calendar resources and land is an economic benefit. Also, I'm assuming that everyone revolts to nationhood in the beginning of the game, because there's no religion to follow and pacifism seems like a terrible philosophy when orcish vikings are knocking on your sole city's doors. The training yard nets that +1 happiness while improving your defenses (+2 with Balseraphs which I've been playing a lot of lately).

Cutting jungles takes a while to be useful, as you don't normally want to settle anticipatorily.

I generally prefer Religion to Nationalism, pre-Apprenticeship. The military bonus is mostly irrelevant and sometimes hurts you, and I normally hit a religion or Pagan Temple before a training yard.


I think Foreign Trade is stronger than aristocracy. And it's complex, because CoL is expensive so you'll generally want cottages beforehand. I'm not entirely happy with the economy balance I left EitB at, but I think it's in a state where there are a lot of different options to do it right.