East India Company Poll

[SLAUGHT3Rz]

Recently there has been a debate between myself and some other Civ players about the effect the East India Company has on the outcome of the game. We all know that whoever builds Oxford and gets bombers will win the game 99% of the time. That is why tournament rules forbid its construction. It is my opinion that East India should be treated the same. Though it might not give a 99% chance of winning when you build it, it definitely has an extremely significant impact on the outcome of the game. I would like everyones feedback on this subject whether you agree or disagree please post your answer and reason behind it.

[Legatus]

I would say it's ok.

Unless you are Spain, or take out Spain early, you have to research Navigation.
This is kind of a risky prop, as the bonus isn't great, and the tech itself is dead end (in contrast to Industrialization).

Also, EITG costs 200 hammers, and you are likely to get Nav much earlier than you would Industrialization/University. Much harder to bank for that wonder; you have to hope for a Great Builder.

While most of us here favor mass expansion, to make EITG viable you do need a bunch of sea tiles. Certainly, if my foe has just 3 generic coastal cities and rushes EITG, I'm not too worried. While it would be hard to win the Oxford race in the above scenario, bombers would still be deadly.

[ITZ DENI3D]

I agree, I have plenty of examples of how it has changed the outcome of the game significantly for or against me, most recently against multi. I nearly beat him as mongols but after gbd EITC he was able to get the gold and tech he needed to be able to keep up with me. Without it he would have undoubtedly lost and he will admit it. So if such a game changer as oxford is banned in tourneys then to me it makes since that EITC should be banned as well. This is only my opinion don't get upset

[asmodeios]

No, not at all. It is not nearly as valuable as oxford.

[ITZ DENI3D]

No, not at all. It is not nearly as valuable as oxford.

If you have a lot of island cities it can be more valuable. I'll take EITC with modern inf over oxford bombers.

[asmodeios]

If you have a lot of island cities it can be more valuable. I'll take EITC with modern inf over oxford bombers.

You are overly reliant on static defenses.

[ITZ DENI3D]

You are overly reliant on static defenses.

If it works, I use it. I will have way more gold, tech and units than the guy with oxford bombers. He may win a few but he can't keep producing units like I can with EITC.

[asmodeios]

So full of ☺☺☺☺

[DA Xcutionerz]

I say ban it from tournament play

[MultiPlayaBeast]

I say ban it from tournament play

Lmbo! You need to start causing trouble.

[Legatus]

Let's ban Democracy.
It give's a 50% trade increase also....

[ITZ DENI3D]

Let's ban Democracy.
It give's a 50% trade increase also....

I don't think any wonders should be banned to be honest...

[REM018]

EITC is a strong wonder and can secure a tech lead or help somebody catch up, but it can be countered. And if I have a GB around the time I get Nav, I often consider using it on Sam's castle instead. Sam's plus fundy and your cats or knights tear through pikemen like butter. Don't ban it, but it is a strong wonder and can tip the scale in your favor.

[Legatus]

Yeah, I mean don't forget that, unless you get that Great Builder, it's a 200-hammer investment.
You should be gettting something strong for that. Frankly, too many wonders are wastes in this game.

Personally, I rarely build the EITC. Not that it's bad, obviously, but I rarely find myself in a situation where it's worthwhile.

[MultiPlayaBeast]

It is perfectly fine to have in the game. I have defeated people countless times and they built that. Hordes of armies can stop pretty much anything if you put the precise figures together. I love all the wonders except perhaps Oxford as it is a bummer to anyone. I mean Sid Meier's really? Bombers that no one can't counter unless they get the very sophisticated tech "flight"? I mean I have no problem with the wonder but when it gives bombers... Thats messed up.

[Legatus]

What makes OXfird bombers tough isn't the bombers themselves, but often the +5 gold in each cities that builder is probably getting by researching Industrialization first.

Still, I've lost depsite getting them enough times to know they aren't the be all end all. A well timed rush by your opponent can still wipe you out, and they can pick up advanced flight in the process.
Since the bombers can't take cities, and they obsolete knights, getting a force there can often be a chore.

Whether this was an intentional design by the programmers to shorten matches, or something the developers/testers utterly overlooked, I have no idea.

[MultiPlayaBeast]

What makes OXfird bombers tough isn't the bombers themselves, but often the +5 gold in each cities that builder is probably getting by researching Industrialization first.

Still, I've lost depsite getting them enough times to know they aren't the be all end all. A well timed rush by your opponent can still wipe you out, and they can pick up advanced flight in the process.
Since the bombers can't take cities, and they obsolete knights, getting a force there can often be a chore.

Whether this was an intentional design by the programmers to shorten matches, or something the developers/testers utterly overlooked, I have no idea.

Good points and I didn't know about the obseleting knights... perhaps I never noticed.

[HydroDragon]

It shouldn't be banned. It's a big investment and needs an expensive tech. Samurai Castle, Leonardo's Workshop, Great Wall, Pyramid, these are all wonders that are better than it in some scenarios.

[ITZ DENI3D]

It shouldn't be banned. It's a big investment and needs an expensive tech. Samurai Castle, Leonardo's Workshop, Great Wall, Pyramid, these are all wonders that are better than it in some scenarios.

Sorry I REALLY have to disagree with you on that. Samurai, Workshop, Great Wall, and Pyramid are nothing compared to EITC. By the time I get to that point GW and Pyramid are obsolete. Samurai won't have much affect against rifleman if you were to go that route. As for workshop it can be good, but not until later in the game. By the time your knights became tanks I would have MI armies with BS fleets with EITC. I have done this several times and many people have tried using sam castle on me but realized they were to late. The only exception being when Redaf used GB on sam and GS on steam and had a fleet same turn. I had EITC. If it would've come one turn later he more than likely would've lost. His sam castle would've become obsolete and I would've gotten way ahead of him in tech. Would've, could've, should've I know... All my GP were humanitarians to be fair

[HydroDragon]

Sorry I REALLY have to disagree with you on that. Samurai, Workshop, Great Wall, and Pyramid are nothing compared to EITC. By the time I get to that point GW and Pyramid are obsolete. Samurai won't have much affect against rifleman if you were to go that route. As for workshop it can be good, but not until later in the game. By the time your knights became tanks I would have MI armies with BS fleets with EITC. I have done this several times and many people have tried using sam castle on me but realized they were to late. The only exception being when Redaf used GB on sam and GS on steam and had a fleet same turn. I had EITC. If it would've come one turn later he more than likely would've lost. His sam castle would've become obsolete and I would've gotten way ahead of him in tech. Would've, could've, should've I know... All my GP were humanitarians to be fair.

You're right that the EITC is, in itself, better than all of them. But I'm taking ease of use into account here. You can get the Pyramid and GW for free and they are definitely better at the very early stages of a game, which is where most games are decided. The Samurai Castle is also easier to build early, since it costs less hammers. Attacking is the most important thing in the game, during a legion or even a Knight rush which would you rather have, EITC or Samurai Castle? How good is your EITC when it's sitting in my newly conquered city?

Of course I'm not recommending building a strategy around any wonder (except oxford) but if a GB or a load of banked hammers comes along at that point the Samurai Castle is probably the best wonder you'll have available. Leonardo's Workshop is perhaps the worst wonder I listed, but again it has it's uses.

Most games shouldn't last long enough for the EITC to be built anyway, that's what I feel is missing from this argument.

Don't bother posturing about how far ahead you'll get with your riflemen and modern infantry. They're not even a factor if you're playing top opposition. And by 'top opposition' I don't mean myself, I haven't played this game seriously in ages and I was never an elite player, I just know the game theory. And remember the samurai castle comes with monarchy, far earlier than the things you've listed.

Again complaining about GP? You're still not finishing your opponents earlier to avoid that issue like I recommended before? You still don't get that "I lost because of these crap GP" = "I can't win unless I have good GP?"

(BTW in your arguments you seem to be assuming that if I don't built a certain wonder then you instantly have the ability to build it which is bullcrap.)

[asmodeios]

Denied still does not understand the importance of being aggressive because he likes long games. Just to turn around and complain that he lost a long game because of passive play and blaming it on luck.

[ITZ DENI3D]

Denied still does not understand the importance of being aggressive because he likes long games. Just to turn around and complain that he lost a long game because of passive play and blaming it on luck.

Not true at all, I do understand that. You don't seem to understand my strategy. To become good you must utilize all aspects of civ. Not just the "aggressive" one... Did you not read the Sun Tzu thread?

“Invincibility lies in the defence; the possibility of victory in the Attack.”

[ITZ DENI3D]

You're right that the EITC is, in itself, better than all of them. But I'm taking ease of use into account here. You can get the Pyramid and GW for free and they are definitely better at the very early stages of a game, which is where most games are decided. The Samurai Castle is also easier to build early, since it costs less hammers. Attacking is the most important thing in the game, during a legion or even a Knight rush which would you rather have, EITC or Samurai Castle? How good is your EITC when it's sitting in my newly conquered city?

Of course I'm not recommending building a strategy around any wonder (except oxford) but if a GB or a load of banked hammers comes along at that point the Samurai Castle is probably the best wonder you'll have available. Leonardo's Workshop is perhaps the worst wonder I listed, but again it has it's uses.

Most games shouldn't last long enough for the EITC to be built anyway, that's what I feel is missing from this argument.

Don't bother posturing about how far ahead you'll get with your riflemen and modern infantry. They're not even a factor if you're playing top opposition. And by 'top opposition' I don't mean myself, I haven't played this game seriously in ages and I was never an elite player, I just know the game theory. And remember the samurai castle comes with monarchy, far earlier than the things you've listed.

Again complaining about GP? You're still not finishing your opponents earlier to avoid that issue like I recommended before? You still don't get that "I lost because of these crap GP" = "I can't win unless I have good GP?"

(BTW in your arguments you seem to be assuming that if I don't built a certain wonder then you instantly have the ability to build it which is bullcrap.)

I'm actually referring to GB's as normally when I see sam castle or EITC built a GB is used. If I had the choice to start off with sam castle or EITC, no doubt I would choose sam castle. But if I am at the point were I can build the EITC I will choose that every time.

[asmodeios]

Not true at all, I do understand that. You don't seem to understand my strategy. To become good you must utilize all aspects of civ. Not just the "aggressive" one... Did you not read the Sun Tzu thread?

“Invincibility lies in the defence; the possibility of victory in the Attack.”

Quoting sun tzu does not give your argument more credibility.

[ITZ DENI3D]

Quoting sun tzu does not give your argument more credibility.

I will let my wins do the talking. No point in arguing.

[HydroDragon]

I will let my wins do the talking. No point in arguing.

That's fair enough actually. BTW are you talking about FFA or H2H here? I'd agree that the EITC would be generally more useful in a FFA with a couple of surviving players. But generally I see that as a sign that none of the players are competent enough to take each other out which suggests a lower quality game, if you see what I mean.

[ITZ DENI3D]

That's fair enough actually. BTW are you talking about FFA or H2H here? I'd agree that the EITC would be generally more useful in a FFA with a couple of surviving players. But generally I see that as a sign that none of the players are competent enough to take each other out which suggests a lower quality game, if you see what I mean.

Both, more FFA than H2H but I apply the same principles to both. You guys don't seem to believe that people have tried this against me before. I am speaking from experience. Asmodeios doesn't like being proven wrong. Obviously if you are just allowed to tech with EITC you will dominate, doesn't mean I haven't gone against several people who have tried to take me out and failed using the strategies you guys are posting.

[asmodeios]

You have yet to ever prove me wrong Denied.

[ITZ DENI3D]

You have yet to ever prove me wrong Denied.

Considering I have only played you twice (that I know of who knows how many accounts you have) I don't see how you have proven me wrong and the first 1 I don't even remember and the second you were conveniently on an island as the Spanish away from my Arabs so ya neither have you...

[MultiPlayaBeast]

Considering I have only played you twice (that I know of who knows how many accounts you have) I don't see how you have proven me wrong and the first 1 I don't even remember and the second you were conveniently on an island as the Spanish away from my Arabs so ya neither have you...

You are becoming quite the player Itz. I think everyone including Asmodeios needs to fear your abilities, no lie.

[MultiPlayaBeast]

You have yet to ever prove me wrong Denied.

I tend to never see you playing... I wish I could get 3 good games against you to see how much you criticize. You a intelligent player from what I have read in your critique but do you practice what you preach enough to face MultiPlayaBeast?

[MultiPlayaBeast]

Again complaining about GP? You're still not finishing your opponents earlier to avoid that issue like I recommended before? You still don't get that "I lost because of these crap GP" = "I can't win unless I have good GP?"

That is so true... Itz do complain tooooooooooooooooo much about gp and that shouldnt be a reason to settle you argument on the reason you lose. You have had game gp's have helped you and the opponent had nothing that was going their way. People dont complain about gp's like you do Itz and the battles isn't based on them. Hydro is right... Do what you got to early to negate chances of games getting to the point of gp's controlling destiny my man. YOu a good player no doubt but your consistent badgering on gp's is noobish my friend.

[ITZ DENI3D]

I actually wasn't complaining I was just saying what GP he got and what ones I got to make a point about EITC. Can you honestly say the person that gets GA's and GH's as opposed to a person who gets GB's and GS's is not playing right? That's all I am saying... If all of one players GP are scientists and the other is humanitarian who is likely to win that match no matter what strategy is used? I do like GP, as it adds an unpredictable factor to the game, which in turn makes it fun. But saying that GP shouldn't affect you if you are being "aggressive" is insane.

[ITZ DENI3D]

Again complaining about GP? You're still not finishing your opponents earlier to avoid that issue like I recommended before? You still don't get that "I lost because of these crap GP" = "I can't win unless I have good GP?"

I base my game play as if I will get no GP, like I said I don't depend on GP my opponents do, which is how the game should be played.

[ITZ DENI3D]

That is so true... Itz do complain tooooooooooooooooo much about gp and that shouldnt be a reason to settle you argument on the reason you lose. You have had game gp's have helped you and the opponent had nothing that was going their way. People dont complain about gp's like you do Itz and the battles isn't based on them. Hydro is right... Do what you got to early to negate chances of games getting to the point of gp's controlling destiny my man. YOu a good player no doubt but your consistent badgering on gp's is noobish my friend.

I admit I was definitely complaining a lot about the two games I lost to you because you flipped half my cities on both games. Irregardless that was unprofessional and I apologize. Can you honestly say you wouldn't have made a big deal about the sole reason you lost both games because half of your cities were flipped in both games? I was embarrassed losing 2 in a row so I felt I had to explain why... Especially since those were my first tournament games lol.

[MultiPlayaBeast]

I admit I was definitely complaining a lot about the two games I lost to you because you flipped half my cities on both games. Irregardless that was unprofessional and I apologize. Can you honestly say you wouldn't have made a big deal about the sole reason you lost both games because half of your cities were flipped in both games? I was embarrassed losing 2 in a row so I felt I had to explain why... Especially since those were my first tournament games lol.

It's understandable bro. It's just you wouldn't let up off of it. Then you get on the forums still on it as if there was no skill on my behalf. IT gets daunting to hear of a game a person wins and a person sticks what would have happened and such or why he build that or whatever. I do get upset when something crazy happens like someone gets three culture flips in a row or two gb's to get colossus and eic but I take and move on.

[ITZ DENI3D]

It's understandable bro. It's just you wouldn't let up off of it. Then you get on the forums still on it as if there was no skill on my behalf. IT gets daunting to hear of a game a person wins and a person sticks what would have happened and such or why he build that or whatever. I do get upset when something crazy happens like someone gets three culture flips in a row or two gb's to get colossus and eic but I take and move on.

Just played another game and beat out oxford bombers even without EITC. Thus proving my point once again...

[Legatus]

MultiPlayer: Yeah, if you have Advanced Flight, you can't build knights. Can still build legions if you haven't researched feudalism yet.
I'm also pretty sure it keeps you from building galleons.

Itz Denied: in that scenario you posted (knights plus samurai castle being no match for rifleman), unless you are playing an Aztec, then a horde of knights plus the castle plus naval support will run through them.
If you are able to put up enough rifleman armies to stop any such assault, then you're probably playing some stiff who doesn't know what he's doing, and frankly, you could have finished him off about an hour earlier.

[MultiPlayaBeast]

MultiPlayer: Yeah, if you have Advanced Flight, you can't build knights. Can still build legions if you haven't researched feudalism yet.
I'm also pretty sure it keeps you from building galleons.

Itz Denied: in that scenario you posted (knights plus samurai castle being no match for rifleman), unless you are playing an Aztec, then a horde of knights plus the castle plus naval support will run through them.
If you are able to put up enough rifleman armies to stop any such assault, then you're probably playing some stiff who doesn't know what he's doing, and frankly, you could have finished him off about an hour earlier.

Legatus... you into total destruction of players you play? As fast and quick as possible? Lol, I know the answer but man if you been still playing alot, I feel sorry for who face you.

[HydroDragon]

I admit I was definitely complaining a lot about the two games I lost to you because you flipped half my cities on both games. Irregardless that was unprofessional and I apologize. Can you honestly say you wouldn't have made a big deal about the sole reason you lost both games because half of your cities were flipped in both games? I was embarrassed losing 2 in a row so I felt I had to explain why... Especially since those were my first tournament games lol.

BTW, do you ever post detailed reports of your games like people do on the H2H thread? I'd be interested in reading a few, I find them very informative. Some games against a decent forum member would be nice as well since then we can have both sides of the story.

I know I seem to criticize you a lot but I've never actually seen you play so maybe you really are unlucky with GPs every game, lol.