Aztec vs USA - Did something a little suspect happen here when he attacked my militia? at time stamp 10.36 I moved the militia and could see nothing within 2 spaces. At 11.11, I'm talking to Japanese and there is the 'waiting for' message. he then attacks my militia at 11.26 (all same turn). Now i'm assuming he didn't have an elite army or he would have had overrun and not get injured? Then again, I suppose he could have been moving an injured march army?
Just hate when than message pops up.
i agree overall. note that i was only talking about the situation in which you have 2 grasslands. i wouldn't recommend it with only one. furthermore, i also primarily thought about rushing the settler with gold once you have banked 8 food (which takes 2 turns on two grasslands). then you can rush another settler out of that same city quite quickly.Originally Posted by Frelinder
also, i specifically had his most southern city kabul in mind. it has 3 or 4 tries and 3 grasslands and no trade. it just seems foolish to me to let that potential production city stay on 1 tree the whole game.
Jack, you need a real scolding! Your battle tactics in the Mongol vs. America game are nearly unforgivable! He takes Tenochtitlan and you sit there and wait. Attack! Then you fight his archer army 9v9, retreat (good) and don't go in with your 2nd army immediately? FFS man. He was wounded. You had a good shot there and you had nothing to lose.
What's next? You mess around with settlers for the next two turns and don't go in with your GG army ever! Looks like others have touched on some of these things so I'll read their comments before continuing.
Sorry Thrasher, I knew fine well this game was over when all he had to fight back with was Archer Armies!!!. The GG army had Blitz and Infiltration, so yes that along with the other 2 HA's could have finished it. I was just messing around having a bit of fun.
The correct play is the favored-odds 3 vs 2.25 that Jack took. He was risking 20 hammers vs. 60 and had the advantage. That is exactly the right thing to do. It was also right when he attacked 9 vs 6 and had the advantage in a 60 hammer vs. 60 hammer exchange. Sometimes you lose those things. Jack positioned himself to attack American horse armies with the odds in his favor three times in the space of a few turns. That's good play.Lol.. well as I said I'm not sure what is the correct play. maybe its because I don't play against so many "elite players" so then I don't think taking this sort of risks is worth it. I try play it safer and always win instead of risking to loose on close battles. But against Elite players this kind of play is better. Need to take larger risks to win those game I guess.
It's just that battle with single horse makes me uncomfortable. I mean look at the game your mongol against Japan Jack. there your KT with attack 6 lost against warr 2 def.. Single horses sucks and it always feels like a cointoss when having thoose battles.
Anyways just saying how i probably would have playing it and thats not meaning your play was realy bad and that my play would have been much better. in this game your play payed off and you won so it worked out for ya
*cheers*
Okay fine. You were playing with your food. Could really burn you if he was any good at all, but I guess it was pretty clear he wasn't.
Lots that could have been done better in this game. luckaly the American player wern't any good.
i just going to comment 2 things. First the failed walk-in.
In the start you had three options to make the walk-in.. you choosed a fourth option which was the wrong one. In 3900BC you saw his boarders and had got 10g from naming tile. If you had settled there you could work 1 tree and one in city making 3 hammers. That means after 2 turns in 3700BC you could rush warr and step down and don't even need to step on his forrest to take empty cap in 3500BC. You choosed keep walking though. In 3800BC same mistake. Now its verry clear that you should have settled north from his forrest tile. Working 3 hammers means warr will step on his forrest in 3600BC. Taking empty cap in 3500BC. Instead you go up north and settle in 3800 BC. One tile further away from Rome. Yes you have 2 trees here but you wan't get your first warr out faster. 2 trees still only 8 gold in 1 turn so with your 10 gold still missing 2 gold. so takes 2 turns getting warr out. Now you rush warr in 3600BC 3 tiles away from cap wich means you can't step at his forrest untill 3500BC wich is to late. Proper option here is to wait to make contact until 3200 BC. Step on forrest at 3100BC and take cap 3000BC. Making contact 3300BC may also work but if unlucky he returns before you attack.
Secon you work to much gold. Use your trees more. After assembling the first HA ASAP with help from working gold you should swich 1 pop barbs that have tree to work the tree instead.. secon HA will come quicker and cheaper that way.
*cheers*
I didn't even think to calculate 3 hammers/turn.
I figured the gold is more flexible, but I suppose I could switch to a warrior and sell if needed. Will keep it in mind, thanks.
Where are the next games. I have work to not do...
Here Don't say i'm not good to you
Awesome. You really displayed some patience in this one.
My boss wants to see you in her office NOW... She doesn't seem to be in good mood...Here Don't say i'm not good to you
Your best so far
Last edited by SVPM; 01-18-2012 at 01:04 PM. Reason: Watch the game
Yeah.. This is good to know because more then often you don't get a hut but you get a naming tile. 3 hammers is enough for pushing out that first warr in 2 turns to make an walk-in. (and you have 2 gold over).
Exactly. you could always switch to a unit and sell it if needing gold. Keep in mind if you got two barbs that both have a tree. If both of them works gold for 10 turns then you got 40 gold. Thats one horse. If both work the tree instead for 10 turns you got 40 hammers wich is equal to two horses.. ONE HORSE FOR FREE::: YAY!!!!
This is alwasys important to think about. You worked alot of gold through the whole game but didn't used all your trees. In my example above only two barbs make this big difference. If you have 5-6 barbcities and other cities we are talking a big army.
In a way you could say that if you could work a tree with every pop whenever you wan'ted to every civ is almost as strong in every time-area as america are in medival.. Still not as flexible because america can shoose where to use their gold/hammers.
*cheers*
Zulu Aztec
Running around like a headless chicken, I had no real plan what I was going to do during this.
Am I particulary slow btw?
I haven't watch this one, but from all the other one. I think that you are slow. You aren't using all the techniques that allows you to save time. You seem to hesitate a lot too. The turns you have more time you should decide in advance what you will do in those that you don't. I posted some quick tips earlier in this thread.
One other thing I saw in your game where you were missing times is that you keep idle unit that you won't use for a long time. Fortify them, but try not to forgive them... It saves a lots of time when you have lots of units.
At the beginning instead of attacking the barb north I would have formed the army and overrung the 3 flags barb. You would have had the goodie in both case but woudn't waste any turn by healing. Overrun is what make the impies so quick to arrive at caps with good upgrade. The +1 move helps alos
You should have declared war on England, before they get BW. They would produce only warriors until 2500 at least when at war.
It's amazing how many golds zulu can get fast.
At times you have run out of time and been unable to complete operations that I think I would have been able to complete. I find it funny that your opponents complain about how long you're taking and then you start taking even longer. That'll teach 'em, I guess. But those guys aren't putting enough thought into their moves. That's usually the case for players who are finished so much sooner than you are. That or they don't have enough going on.
It looks as though you read what Brennos has to say every time he threatens you. I don't think many of us do that. As SVPM says, you seem to hesitate a lot. I think you're slower than most ranked players, but don't let that bother you too much. It's a problem when you can't actually finish your turn. You are also terrible about prioritizing important things. You walk a caravan around when you really need to declare war on England before they get a longbow up. You nearly miss your chance to take that warrior. This isn't a crucial point in the game obviously, because you already have two caps, but you do that kind of thing a lot. I've also seen you try at least twice to sell techs to the AI when you have zero techs and the timer is running down. That's not really a good use of your time.
All that being said, if you were up against somebody who actually knew how to play, you'd have more time because he would be taking more time. Still, prioritization is a must. Eventually we will have a video of you moving your caravan around searching for an exploration tile when suddenly your horse army gets killed by your opponent who you should have spotted. Your attention has to go to the front first. If you're busy, sell the caravan. Exploration is important, but not at the expense of battle tactics.
LOL!
i'm also addicted to civ rev videos. unfortunately, i'm in the midst of a 4 day long exam, it's 3 am and i have to deliver at 12. i don't even have time to play civ rev myself but i can't stop watching these videos as displacement activity. if i fail the examination, it's jackhall's fault.
you really are too slow. it hurts a little to watch your videos.
BTW, often i would form armies faster than you. but it worked out fine for you so perhaps you should just continue like that. even though you could've gotten a few quicker overruns of barbs.
and you could've also gone for horses since you had enough gold but i suppose irrigation and republic is the safer and perhaps also more fun road.
Two walk ins, including democracy--pretty good stuff. A few things I might have done...
I probably would have formed my first impi army earlier. Probably wouldn't have had my 100g city on balanced. And I would have chosen blitz over scout--I like having the "extra" army.
Looked like your opponent was really pushing you on the timer. All things considered, good game.
You mean working balanced? I done it again? sheesh.
This one is just Bizarre France v USA - Ranked 34 min
how big are these files?
I just recorded one and it was 81 meg... is that big? game was about 9 mins...
That's tiny. A 30 min video averages between 3-4gb recorded. 400-600 meg after publishing for upload. I believe Duke's are bigger again as he's working with HD.
hmm mine will be SLD (super low D) but heh thats ok just for fun eh...
now i need someone to come on line and thrash me!
This calculation really only works if you have 10 turns available. If your opponent is pressing, you should probably switch to different tactics. Or what if one of your 1 pop barb cities gets captured 8 turns in? You lose all your banked hammers there. That is a huge loss and will set you back.Exactly. you could always switch to a unit and sell it if needing gold. Keep in mind if you got two barbs that both have a tree. If both of them works gold for 10 turns then you got 40 gold. Thats one horse. If both work the tree instead for 10 turns you got 40 hammers wich is equal to two horses.. ONE HORSE FOR FREE::: YAY!!!!
What I usually try is to get my HA together as quickly as possible. Which could mean that working gold in the barb towns and working 2 trees in your cap is better, since your cap is basically doing 6 hammers a turn (if you have 2 barb cities). So one horse will be ready in 4 turns, the next in 3 and the last one in another 3 turns. That is a total of 10 turns, but you will have 1 horse out in 4 turns and a 2nd in a total of 7 turns. Whereas if the barb towns worked trees, you would get 1 horse in 5 turns (from cap) and the other 2 after 10 turns. Well, you could argue that after 10 turns, your cap would have produced a 4th horse by that time, so you get a free horse. Which is nice too, but your 2 horses out quicker can explore, get more barb towns and start gaining XP for vet status.
In general working hammers is better than gold, but not always - especially if time is critical. But if you have 10 turns of time and you know your opponent is not going to show up and take one of your barb towns, then working hammers will result in 4 horses in 10 turns rather than 3. But I think it is key to get that HA together and I usually take the earlier horses over 1 extra horse later.
Correct in some parts. I did say after assembleing the first HA. The first HA should be pushed out ASAP. After that I recommend using hammers. But It depends.. If you get walk-in or 2-3 realy early Barbs Then setting one of the barbs at hammer also is could be correct move to get the first HA going faster.
You don't need 10 turns. If you only work the tree for 1 turn and then extract a horse from that barbcity you have gained 2 gold instead of working gold in it. Its slower and not so good to only prod horses in your cap. Lets say you have 2 barbcities. As you say it takes 4 turns for a horse in cap if barbs is set on gold. So after 10 turns you then get your secon HA. However if both barbcities is working tree you will after 10 turns have your secon HA plus one extra horse. People often rush horse from cap after hammered a few turns on it if storing hammers in barbcity yes you will loose hammers there if its taken. Same thing if you got gold. When your opponent take a city he will take gold from you. Mongol rely on hammers and not gold. With 3-5 early barbs you can have 10 hammers/turn. Much better then 10 gold/turn. And you can always rush unit in barbcity that have stored hammers if you desperatly need gold.
Another thing you most times always have a little gold. So lets say you got 40 gold. First HA is out. You got 2 barbcities. Both barbcities have water and a tree. Put your barbcities on tree. After 5 turns rush horse in your barbcities for 20 gold each and your cap have hammered a horse for 0 gold. this means you got your secon HA after 5 turns. If you set your barbs on gold and only rush/prod horses in cap it will takes you 7 turns to get your secon HA. 40 gold(initial gold) + 28 gold(barbs) + 28 hammers(cap) = 124 gold. Thats one HA and 4 gold. So you get your secon HA out 2 turns faster if working tree.
So no... You don't need 10 turns for this to work. And if your opponent is pressing getting your secon HA out after 5 turns is better then after 7 turns.
*cheers*
France V USA
I think I started reasonably well in this one (should have sold a warrior rather than work Gold, I suppose for the 100).
I intended keeping HA no.2 home at first, but when I saw the lay of the land going for Kyoto, decided to venture. HA No.2 could have been faster.
The WA on the galley, turned out useless, but not sure if a good move or not?
I then sort of completely lost it in the middle, Built a 3rd HA for protection (Good, Bad?) then dithered sending on the attack.
Other than the time issues (again!) at London, was I right to wait and vet the 2nd HA, then wait again to move both in the same turn?
A few games I done nothing with GP, what’s the best use of a Builder that early?
I did not know that we had 40g available. That changes things of course. 20 relocatable hammers is a big difference. Then it makes sense to use more spread-out hammers than gold.
But overall you are still treating hammers and gold as if they were comparable in all aspects.
10 hammers/turn are 2 hammers per city and those hammers can not be used to rush production in another city. That is a problem if your opponent shows up earlier than you expected. That is all I am saying. The statement that 10 hammers/turn is better than 10g/turn is only true if all 10 hammers are generated in one city for building something in that city. As soon as more than one city is involved, it becomes more difficult to weigh your options and hammers everywhere is not always the right call.With 3-5 early barbs you can have 10 hammers/turn. Much better then 10 gold/turn
And the gold you lose when a city is taken is anywhere from 0 - 50% of your stored gold. Which is not as bad as losing 8 out of 10 hammers.
Yes I agree in most. But I'm not comparing gold as the same thing as hammers. Horses are very mobile. produce them in several cities is not a problem. Ofcourse barbcities far away are better of working gold in the early game to help pushing out the horses. but closer barbs that got tree should work that tree to get out as many horses as cheap as possible as fast as possible. okay so lets say you don't have 40g. But you always got some gold with Mongol, naming tile, threaten, selling techs, friendly huts etc, selling warr etc.. using close barbs to cap that have a tree to help push out the horses faster and cheaper is better. Yes having an unprotected barb that enemy likely could galley drop or take with unit is not good to have stored hammers in for 8 turns. I would either see so its protected or rush horse in it after maybe 4-5 turns. If it feels verry uncertain and not safe then use for gold is best though.
All I'm saying using trees is 90% of the time better then working gold. And you can always do both. Partly hammer, partly gold and rush when cost is low.
In the mongol game vs America Jack made 3 HAs. Thats 9 horses. and from what i recall he pretty much didn't use any barb that had tree to help push out thoose horses. He used his cap and Rome. The barbs worked gold. Also one of them he early started to grow that had tree, grass and water. (west from cap) but then he stopped growing it and worked gold there. He should have growed it to 2 and then worked 1 tree and 1 on gold. Not using trees properly like he did in this game is like giving away 80 gold.. he did a good job but it can be done better. without taking risks etc.. just better managing of your production.
When I play mongol i also often use the barbcity as sling-shot. often the barb is in the middle of your cap and the other cap you wanna attack. If that barb got tree then bank hammers there. push out the first 2 horses from banked hammers in your cap. when secon horse leave cap put pop in cap on water to work gold. Then when secon horse is in lvl with the barb city then rush horse in barbcity(should be cheap because of banked hammers) and move 2 tiles closer to AI cap. Next turn form HA and get 4 movement with your last horse that left your own cap. This way you get your first HA much quicker to AI cap. So often it is usefull that your cities are spread out.
Mongol don't get 100g city to use as sling-shot (if very lucky they do) But you can use barbs doing this instead.
*cheers*
Right. That cost you a turn.
No real need for home defense against this hump. I would want two armies in the field against a good America player as well though. You have to cause pain early. If you can't do that, protecting your capital won't make any difference.
I think it's fine, but at one point you unloaded your horse army in a seemingly random spot. What was that all about?
There was clearly no need for the 3rd army (or 4th one you started on!). With the number of cities you had, you could tech Iron Working very quickly. Remember you ran into this guy at like 700 BC. If he's good, you're coming across knights, not empty library cities.
I definitely would have ignored that barb to go after London. It cost you like three turns to get it. Also, best to attack with your vet horse army first, then Blitz second.
Just save it like you did. If you didn't already have Fundamentalism, you might have gone for the Pyramid, since you had Ceremonial Burial. If things get tight, you can GB a barracks or even a horseman.
How about that America player's strategy? Libraries and CoL in ancient and he's way up to three cities 33 turns into the game. How the heck did he manage to keep his cities so small? Even working balanced he should have grown a little in that much time. Yeah, that's pretty bizarre.
I had been thinking how the Zulu hadn’t turned up in any of my games, then thaey come along twice in the one night.
Random Zulu v Egypt – Ranked
Fun Times, this one!
Well yeah, If he was good he would have had London/Monarchy and I would have had no chance. Thanks for the other comments.
You still would probably had been first to Kyoto though and would have had fundy. With your 2 HAs you would have had a great shot at taking London from him and then killing him.
Mmm.. odd. As you say a good american player could have 15+ cities by 700BC and be able to rush a KA every turn.
They galley was good I think. It didn't payed of but normaly it would.
I would try get Monarchy as fast as possible and then rush Samurai Castle.
Aperantly this american player couldn't play. but if you had been up against a good player and you had got the chance of threaten England to get Monarchy I would try that. Even if That means I'll can't take the cap if obtaining the tech and be forced into peace. You had 3 HAs. With religion and Sams Castle thats equal to Knights. So its like having 3 KAs at 1000BC wich is nice.. Also if you make legions you got more cheap strong units too.. against a good American player you need alot of as strong units as possible on the board early to beat him before he can spam KAs.. A good american player would have been in medival fast and could have rushed AAs cheap in his first citys and would have had his own HAs for countering. Your 13,5 attack might not have worked. but with Sams castle you would have a chanse..
*cheers*
That's pretty moot. A good player would have had London before Jack could even find it. I can't think of a scenario in which he has a real shot at taking London but could also threaten for Monarchy and his opponent is any kind of threat at all. In any case, taking the city is better because it gives him access to his enemy.
But that scenario doesn't make any sense because like I said, a good opponent would take London. We can put London somewhere else on the map. Even so, Jack's position will still be worse because he wouldn't get all those barbs (this guy didn't explore at all!) and would have pressure.
Jack, make sure you play some forum members, not just all these kittens. Trust me, these guys will wreck your game. After a while you start thinking you're awesome because you out-expanded somebody's China with the Mongols starting from a 5 tile island and never got any barbs or artifacts. Maybe I can catch up with you over the weekend.
Haha... don't worry - I'm under no illusion these are 'good' wins. I know Liam tried for a game last night (sorry), but keep messaging me, I will quit a ranked game to play a forum member. In fact - just send me an invite.
Yes a good America player would have taken London on this map. Thats why i wrote that in the start in my post. I was talking theoretically. For example if switched place with Koyoto. Jack had encountered American single horse and killed it and he had got an message that america had taken Koyoto(koyoto on the plase were London were) and Jack now advance to London (up north) Then try threaten for Monarchy is not a bad choise. He had 3 HAs by now so with Sams Castle he would have a great shot.
Anyway he was asking what to do if getting GB this early in general. I was simply thinking getting Monarchy is a priority to be able to rush Sam castle. when having several HAs then getting this tech is more worth then getting the cap. so try threaten to get the tech first. If not then take cap and hopefully you get the tech anyway. Thats ofcourse the best if you do get the tech when taking cap.
yeah I agree on thats it a little bit booring to look at games when opponent do nothing. Its like watching a SP game. Games that include real battletactics and with an opponent that actually is doing something would be great.
Keep feeding us with your videos
*cheers*
Why not just take the city? It would have to be pretty early to have the situation you describe. I guess I'm saying you can bend over backward to come up with a scenario in which trying to threaten for Monarchy is better, but generally if you can take the city in a couple of turns (he took it in one turn once he was ready, remember), that's the best thing to do.
And honestly, having one of Fundamentalism or Samurai Castle is pretty big, but I don't think having both matter that much in this situation. Archer armies are not Jack's worry. His worry is that America will amass sufficient offensive units to kill his three horse armies and then he's in bad shape. If America defends turf with a few archers and 3 horse/legion armies, then Jack will probably lose. If America can't scrape all that together, then Jack probably wins.
None tonight, unfortunately. Are you or Showtek (or any other PS3 player) likely to be on tomorrow (Friday) 16.00-19.30 GMT? I could fire up the PS3 for some recording.Keep feeding us with your videos
Yes you are probably right. Most games its ofcourse best to just take the cap.
I do belive though that the extra city late in the game wan't give as much as instant Sams castle would against a good American player. you will not outtech or outexpand the american player. Only shot is to take your 3 HAs ASAP to his cities and try killing him fast before he gets to strong. 18 attack can overrun single archers (if not fully fortified) and kill AAs quite easy (if not vet or cap) Anyways its just a theoreticall thouht in a certain scenario.
*cheers*
I could probably play This Sunday somewere between 12:00-18:00 +1 GMT.
*cheers*
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
