Arvcran
Worker
Tourney Director
Remember the purpose of CIV / BtS is enjoyment, entertainment, and hobby!
Posts: 181
|
Post by Arvcran on Oct 3, 2006 21:30:14 GMT -5
It would be very interesting to hear AOE's serious thoughts on 1v1 Ancient Mirror duels ;-). Seeing as she is owning that event in CCC for last 3 I think.
Trade secrets are hard to come by though lol.
|
|
|
Post by notagoodname on Oct 3, 2006 23:38:27 GMT -5
Wow old thread, warlords changed a lot of the strategies, i think this thread should be started from scratch.
Since Warlords my usual strategy is to expand to horses asap. This is the opposite of regular CIV where metal was the first resource i went to connect. Early chariots don't have a counter imho, sure spearmen can sit in a city and protect adjacent squares but anything futher than that chariots can plunder.
The barracks + stables + war chariot combo is unbeatable imho if you can get it happening early. Shock upgraded war chariots are cheap and unkillable in any way that's cost effective. Spears/impis get hurt by shock war chariots enough that a second chariot will finish them. Not to mention the double move ties up a ton of their defenders as they try to cover every square of their land.
Civ choice has changed as well, zulu, india, mali, aztec, egypt and persia are respectable choices. With egypt being the main one i'd choose (egypt beats all but zulu, even then they have a good chance though). Inca arn't agressive so they are off my list of civs to choose, as you won't win the 1v1 warrior battles as easily, thus ruining their choking potential.
|
|
|
Post by churchill1 on Oct 4, 2006 4:09:19 GMT -5
Zulu every time for me. Shaka has the quickest early build up as barracks and granary are essential. Having two types of double move units leaves a lot of options open.
As for tactics: It's real important to get both horse and metal, so that you can fully partake in the rock, paper, scissors thingy. If you don't get horse opposition can just send waves of axes. If there is no horse (may be 1 in 3 games?) then it's much like vanilla civ and axes own til eles and cats.
|
|
|
Post by tommynt on Oct 4, 2006 5:55:31 GMT -5
noname u noob inca uu is agri - thats why it is still a great early choking civ and now it got 2 nice building traits in later game agri isnt that important anymore as choke axes now got a counter
|
|
|
Post by notagoodname on Oct 4, 2006 7:07:24 GMT -5
noname u noob inca uu is agri - thats why it is still a great early choking civ and now it got 2 nice building traits in later game agri isnt that important anymore as choke axes now got a counter nuts they do too, well inca are still great for early warrior choke then
|
|
|
Post by tamijo on Oct 17, 2006 4:33:19 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 !!! What is the point off more than one religion - others wont get any ?
|
|
|
Post by notagoodname on Oct 17, 2006 19:58:43 GMT -5
No he means he uses it for simple border expansion without having to build missionaries/obelisks/stonehenge. A city founding a religion gets a border expansion from culture, so if you found religions as you build cities you will never need to build obelisks. I can only imagine it being worthwhile doing this for the cheap religions though.
|
|
|
Post by churchill1 on Oct 18, 2006 7:07:53 GMT -5
It's a lot better culture than standard though. 5/turn is kinda handy.
|
|
|
Post by mrsaturn on Oct 18, 2006 23:53:48 GMT -5
I'm a little unclear about founding religions and culture. I've noticed the following-
If you found a religion and it's your first religion, your founding city will get 5 culture no matter what. You don't have to convert to get culture.
If you have a religion and you found another one, that founding city will not get any culture until you convert to that religion.
I've noticed this mostly in 1v1 ren games, where each city you make invents a religion.
|
|
|
Post by ironclad on Oct 19, 2006 1:18:39 GMT -5
i think the best civ by far on mirror map is egypt because if there is no iron or copper on map close or non at all you have a distinct advantage
|
|
|
Post by mrsaturn on Oct 19, 2006 2:02:42 GMT -5
i think the best civ by far on mirror map is egypt because if there is no iron or copper on map close or non at all you have a distinct advantage By the same logic, wouldn't Persia be just as good? Immortals rape archers.
|
|
|
Post by notagoodname on Oct 19, 2006 2:29:06 GMT -5
Yay Ironclad, someone agrees with me about egypt i think the best civ by far on mirror map is egypt because if there is no iron or copper on map close or non at all you have a distinct advantage By the same logic, wouldn't Persia be just as good? Immortals rape archers. If there is no metal at all sure immortals are good, only the enemies chariots can hope to stand up to them and you can never really dig out a defending immortal without spears. With egypt though nothing can stand up to them at all, not even enemy chariots. Immortals don't rape spears or other chariots when attacking like war chariots do. War chariots beat other chariots and get very close to taking out spears with the shock upgrade that stables gives them. They are only 16 hammers vs a spears 23 too. So with war chariots you arn't gambling on there being no metal like you are with persia. The industrial trait is huge if the game comes down to score too.
|
|
|
Post by churchill1 on Oct 19, 2006 9:54:44 GMT -5
i think the best civ by far on mirror map is egypt because if there is no iron or copper on map close or non at all you have a distinct advantage Hm don't think I've ever seen a mirror map with no metal at all. Much more likely to have no horse.
|
|
|
Post by churchill1 on Oct 19, 2006 9:57:06 GMT -5
For me it's protected (if there is horse) axes then massive amounts of catapults.
|
|
|
Post by venceslas on Oct 19, 2006 9:58:20 GMT -5
It happened sometime. Last, was yesteday. Zanzibar has slaughered me with persian horse(one case from the capital). No copper or iron on all the maps for my poor Zulous chris.
|
|
|
Post by tommynt on Oct 19, 2006 14:53:41 GMT -5
If u can pick civs u should pick a civ with a nonres dependent uu - everything else is gambeling and gambeling is what u should not aim for if your long term target is a win% above 70%. Picking perisa gypt or zulu CAN win u the game in maybe like 15% of games, but what about the other 85% of games?
mali and tecs are surly still the no1 civpicks and i d still have gandhi and Inca behind em - nm what the land looks like u ll have something what the other dont have. On high lvl play the options playing on a 1-1 mirror map are limited. Good players ll do kinda like the same. Combat calculator, missmoves and huts keep the game interesting, away from a draw like situation. But having a uu as backup may turn it in your favour. Apart that are both the skirm aswell as the jag are amazing units for their costs, both being able to fight every resdependent unit when using the advatage attacking units have over defending units.
Apart that i think that my choke and outbuild same time strat is still the best way to play a 1-1. In every era. This is the only strat that let u win vs a equal skilled opponent without relying on fastmoves or combat luck.
Clever worker usage, good timing of slaving, clever city placement and scouting are the basic stuff which most players have still to work on I think
|
|
|
Post by deviousdevil on Oct 19, 2006 17:11:31 GMT -5
Yup Tommynt, your choking is something to be despised as it is exactly what I aim for with Mali and their UU as the weapon.
1vs1 you have to slow down your opposition and hamper their development whilst yours prospers, luck of the mali/aztec uu is the way forward.
|
|
|
Post by deviousdevil on Oct 19, 2006 17:16:33 GMT -5
It would be very interesting to hear AOE's serious thoughts on 1v1 Ancient Mirror duels ;-). Seeing as she is owning that event in CCC for last 3 I think. Trade secrets are hard to come by though lol. I don't exist anymore. AOE is a chariot rushing fiend that is her secret and she takes Aztec to release herself from 'the choke' until she caught the Zulu bug too.
|
|
|
Post by churchill1 on Oct 19, 2006 19:55:40 GMT -5
Picking perisa gypt or zulu CAN win u the game in maybe like 15% of games, but what about the other 85% of games? I pick zulu for the traits - mega quick build up = early advantage no matter what units you're making. The uu is just a nice add on and it is very rare there is no metal anyway.
|
|
|
Post by notagoodname on Oct 23, 2006 19:13:22 GMT -5
New patch for warlords will change 1v1s civ4players.proboards44.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=1161636856The new walords patch is going to give Jaguars woodsman1. With a barracks this means you get double moves to the enemies cities and will be impossible to dig out once there. Jaguars are already very cheap (much much cheaper than regular swordsman). They already get combat 1 from Aztecs agressive trait. They can beat both spears and chariots just fine and match axes in defensive terrain. They require no resources, just the iron working tech (can be gotten very quickly if you go straight for it). It's obviously demanded by the newbs who didn't understand that Jaguars were especially good in ancient 1v1s with lots of forest and jungle everywhere. Aztec will now be unbeatable in ancient 1v1s. How can the enemy get an expansion out when you have unkillable double-move units in the forest around their capital before you can even get to a resource? One thing that may counter aztecs strength a bit is that zulus now get +50% worker production. So we will probably see a 2 horse race in ancient 1v1. Zulus and Aztecs, with every other civ getting choked by these units.
|
|