|
Post by salqadri on Feb 2, 2006 12:52:56 GMT -5
Hi guys, Tony invited me to a 1v1 today, and given my current +34 streak, I refused, worried about the luck involved in terms of civ, starting pos, resources etc. Kinda cheap, but its my first streak of the sort . He agreed, but mainly if both parties are already good at 1v1. Its not that easy. So, I would like to invite you 1v1 ownage experts out there to post your strategies here.
|
|
|
Post by tommynt on Feb 2, 2006 19:32:04 GMT -5
ownage expert?
ok that the way i play ..
choke a bit .. some do more some do less but 1 warr should be minimum - on superclose starts superhaevy chooke might pay off aswell
go workers .. i get 3 of em
have allways 1 more warr at home as opp is sending .. dont loose workers .. sometimes u need 2 war more as he got
dont forget to let cap grow .. too amyn people play wiht size 1 caps for too long time .. when getting worker/settler u get produtction AND food fromt tile what means bigger sizes pay off twice when getting workers .. i try to connect 1 food res as fast as posible
go res ... while conecting maybe get 2ndsettler allready oh well if horse in cap and opp no mettal or under choke - just get 10 chariots and if your opp didnt get mettal in time he s dead .. just pillage nuts outa him
if res not in cap .. go really fast for it .. plant right beside it - aslo go for mettal not for horse
iff both got bronze/iron in cap dont waste to much on triyng to be afst - just outaxe over time and fiught clever
just try to enter his woods and see what happens .. scout .. but dont scout too risky
outaxe means .. get only axe and catas and 1 spear for his horses
never stop xpanding
no wonders
proly henge or some else if u got res for it
never stop expanding! .. 5 cities are plantable on every map
kill
|
|
|
Post by Atomation on Feb 13, 2006 18:11:06 GMT -5
Yes, if you want to win 1x1 you really have to expand. If you can expand without the enemy being able to stop you, do so and do it fast. The more safe cities you have, the better off you'll be. Ignore any claims that expanding is bad.
|
|
icbm
Settler
Posts: 60
|
Post by icbm on Mar 9, 2006 2:00:08 GMT -5
Is this a discussion of 1v1 ancient or 1v1 in general? Because in later eras I keep a close eye on what the opponent is doing(mostly looking to power graph and score) and if he's rising a lot in scrore but not in military I waste no time in stabbing him and usually it's quite succesfull when done right. So expand, but don't expand foolishly, it can cost you a lot. In the end, it's all about knowing what your opponent is doing, can't relaly generalize stuff
|
|
|
Post by tommynt on Mar 9, 2006 3:11:00 GMT -5
oh well a lot stays same in later eras - also the never stop expanding thing - if u dont expand but your opponent does - there ll be at some point only 2 option attack or concede - or 0 option attack and concede (if failed)
|
|
icbm
Settler
Posts: 60
|
Post by icbm on Mar 9, 2006 3:56:51 GMT -5
Of course, but if your oppoentn expands while you're launching a planned amphibious assault for example, your opponent can lead with a 1000 points and still end up dead. But sure, if you let your opponent take the upper hand and superior production, you're quite surely dead.
|
|
|
Post by dirkpitt on Mar 26, 2006 21:25:22 GMT -5
Wow guys this is some great stuff. I still have a problem with how to micro enough to have my cap grow and produce settlers and workers. If you have a successful choke its much easier but any tips on to survive a good rush. Any help would be great.
|
|
|
Post by churchill1 on Apr 24, 2006 16:34:35 GMT -5
i can vouch for the fact that u shouldnt go for horse. go metal, metal, metal.
|
|
|
Post by churchill1 on May 23, 2006 3:28:06 GMT -5
not sure this thread is seeing a lot of action. but i have recently got into 1v1 and at last i am seeing some success.
with regards to wonders i see a lot of peeps go for henge and oracle. tommy really downplays there importance. may be others could comment.
also, i'd like to know some good players (esp tommy's) thoughts on tech order. what to go for and why. i think this would be useful for general play as well.
come one. we need more peeps posting.
|
|
|
Post by deyreepher on May 23, 2006 6:48:56 GMT -5
Stonehenge is nice, but if you're creative, why bother?
Oracle is nice, but for them to maximize it they can either go Metal Casting or have to research Monarchy for Feudalism. If they go Metal Casting, they should have exhausted almost all their trees once their forges are done and hopefully you've either choked the hell out of them or beaten them completely. If they go Feudalism, they had to have skipped out on some key military techs or you should have expanded and gotten your key resources to put some muscle on them at this point.
However.....with Ancient-Classical, it's hard to say. Not being able to turn off tech huts throws a monkey wrench into what I think about Oracle. People popping Monarchy/Metal Casting from a hut is hard to catch up on.
Why those huts would have those techs is beyond me. If you think about it, a village that has the knowledge of Metal Casting or is organized enough to have Monarchy should be a civ in its own right and should have owned you. But that's just one of the quirks of this game.
|
|
|
Post by Ellestar on May 24, 2006 0:52:06 GMT -5
not sure this thread is seeing a lot of action. but i have recently got into 1v1 and at last i am seeing some success. with regards to wonders i see a lot of peeps go for henge and oracle. tommy really downplays there importance. may be others could comment. also, i'd like to know some good players (esp tommy's) thoughts on tech order. what to go for and why. i think this would be useful for general play as well. come one. we need more peeps posting. In 5v5, Henge gives a bonus for everyone. I think it's like 3 Obelisks if you're Industrious so it pays for itself almost immediately. Also, only one of the players tries to make it. In 1v1 you have significantly less cities than 5 player team in a teamer and you'll cripple your economy too much by doing it.
|
|
|
Post by mrsaturn on May 24, 2006 3:12:18 GMT -5
Let's say through a combination of bad luck and timing, an enemy warrior is parked in a forest (or if you're really unfortunate, a forested hill) outside your city. You have a warrior defending your city. It's still very early in the game- what do you do?
Do you 1) research archery, build an archer and try to kill him? 2) build warriors and try to kill him? 3) build a warrior then a worker, improve your tiles defending with the warrior and hope the odds go in your favor? 4) build a warrior and try to choke his city? 5) research bronze working, build warriors to kill the choker while building your city, and slave a worker to catch up?
It seems that an early choke can set your development back a lot, since you can't just pop a worker and chop/improve the terrain without some defense.
|
|
|
Post by Elledge on May 24, 2006 8:17:20 GMT -5
Let's say through a combination of bad luck and timing, an enemy warrior is parked in a forest (or if you're really unfortunate, a forested hill) outside your city. You have a warrior defending your city. It's still very early in the game- what do you do? Do you 1) research archery, build an archer and try to kill him? 2) build warriors and try to kill him? 3) build a warrior then a worker, improve your tiles defending with the warrior and hope the odds go in your favor? 4) build a warrior and try to choke his city? 5) research bronze working, build warriors to kill the choker while building your city, and slave a worker to catch up? It seems that an early choke can set your development back a lot, since you can't just pop a worker and chop/improve the terrain without some defense. 5 sounds like the obvious plan if you have copper; bronze working should already be done researching by the time someone else gets a warrior up your butt.
|
|
|
Post by Bantams on May 24, 2006 8:51:27 GMT -5
Let's say through a combination of bad luck and timing, an enemy warrior is parked in a forest (or if you're really unfortunate, a forested hill) outside your city. You have a warrior defending your city. It's still very early in the game- what do you do? Do you 1) research archery, build an archer and try to kill him? 2) build warriors and try to kill him? 3) build a warrior then a worker, improve your tiles defending with the warrior and hope the odds go in your favor? 4) build a warrior and try to choke his city? 5) research bronze working, build warriors to kill the choker while building your city, and slave a worker to catch up? It seems that an early choke can set your development back a lot, since you can't just pop a worker and chop/improve the terrain without some defense. 5 sounds like the obvious plan if you have copper; bronze working should already be done researching by the time someone else gets a warrior up your butt. Shouldnt you do 3 and 5 at the same time perhaps?
|
|
|
Post by tommynt on May 24, 2006 11:34:58 GMT -5
just get a 2nd warrior block with him your worker and have the warrior in cap to help out i d research bronze before archery
there are guys who build a 2nd warrior and just attck the guy in wood with 2 of theirs - works too often to be called dumb - i still dont like it
|
|
|
Post by churchill1 on May 24, 2006 11:50:38 GMT -5
yeah i've seen it work tommy. i think the odds are against it though. it's about as likely as two warriors killing ur first city (with one warrior defending it) i guess. i've seen some people trying this lately (one person in particular). but get this, the other day one warrior killed my warrior in it's city with 40% culture over a river. game over. man that sucked. he didnt even have a back up warrior. thanks for all the comments btw. another question: does anyone bother with religion at all in 1v1?
|
|
|
Post by tommynt on May 24, 2006 14:59:59 GMT -5
religion is much more imp as mayn think PRO TIP: !!! discover religion after founding 2nd city - boarders ll expand superfast !!! !!! discover another relgion when having built next city !!!
|
|
|
Post by knupp on May 24, 2006 17:51:43 GMT -5
If the other person's capital city isn't on a hill and is guarded by one warrior while I have two outside his city I will almost always attack. The first warrior will die giving the second warrior around a 60% chance (usually) to burn the city. I've killed a lot of people doing this.
|
|
|
Post by Ellestar on May 25, 2006 0:50:06 GMT -5
there are guys who build a 2nd warrior and just attck the guy in wood with 2 of theirs - works too often to be called dumb - i still dont like it 26% chance that unfortified warrior in a forest will win vs 2 (and 4% vs 3). If it's fortified in a forest it has 57% chance vs 2, 19.5% chance vs 3 Hardly a good idea to attack. I won one teamer that way - some player attacked with a stack of 3 and lost all. 19.5% chance isn't that uncommon.
|
|
|
Post by tommynt on May 25, 2006 12:24:44 GMT -5
u think the "dumb" are succesful in 75%. hm if it s like that it s not dumb as u r rid of the guy and got yourself a promoted warrior
i d still never atatck a guys in wood if there s some other option - not even if i got 4 warriros
|
|