I gave this one a shot. I thought for a long time about how to approach it. The most clever approach I could think of was to shoot for super-early longbows and let the AI incur ridiculous war weariness crashing against my well-defended cities.
So, I beelined the Oracle:
![[Image: feudslingvq8.jpg]](http://img61.imageshack.us/img61/7181/feudslingvq8.jpg)
And here's an overview shot I took when the AI hordes were starting to descend:
![[Image: empireoverviewcj4.jpg]](http://img122.imageshack.us/img122/8060/empireoverviewcj4.jpg)
However, things didn't pan out the way I'd expected. Strangely, the AI largely bypassed my other cities and aimed for my capital. And instead of suiciding against my cities, the AI stacks usually bounced back and forth between nearby forests or hills and only occasionally attacked my defenders. No war weariness for the AI if it doesn't attack me!
So, I stagnated. I played for a couple hundred years into the AD era, before deciding that the strategy, at least as I implemented it, was a bust. I report it here with the thinking that a negative result is potentially useful/interesting too.
I actually returned to the epic later and tried more of a delayed rush strategy. I built a 15 troop stack that was ready to crush Montezuma in 1000BC. It did. I'd also pre-chopped three rings of forests around the capital for quick conversion to more troops. These largely rolled over Suryavarman.
I figured I could plod through at 3 vs. 1 on Prince, but I didn't really have the time. (Plus, it would've been just a shadow game.) I guess I'm usually more focussed on strategy than tactics. Both were necessary here. I'm learning a bit more about tactics from others' reports. (Thank you for those!)
I must say that this played *very* differently than the first Always War epic. I'm quite impressed with the improvements in the AI's battle tactics. It's rather refreshing that cheesey tactics (e.g.: let the AI stifle itself in war weariness by suiciding with no real chance against my cities) don't work. Nice work, Blake et alia!
And thanks for the scenario, Sullla. I hope I can come up with something clever and successful for the next AW event.
So, I beelined the Oracle:
And here's an overview shot I took when the AI hordes were starting to descend:
However, things didn't pan out the way I'd expected. Strangely, the AI largely bypassed my other cities and aimed for my capital. And instead of suiciding against my cities, the AI stacks usually bounced back and forth between nearby forests or hills and only occasionally attacked my defenders. No war weariness for the AI if it doesn't attack me!
So, I stagnated. I played for a couple hundred years into the AD era, before deciding that the strategy, at least as I implemented it, was a bust. I report it here with the thinking that a negative result is potentially useful/interesting too.
I actually returned to the epic later and tried more of a delayed rush strategy. I built a 15 troop stack that was ready to crush Montezuma in 1000BC. It did. I'd also pre-chopped three rings of forests around the capital for quick conversion to more troops. These largely rolled over Suryavarman.
I figured I could plod through at 3 vs. 1 on Prince, but I didn't really have the time. (Plus, it would've been just a shadow game.) I guess I'm usually more focussed on strategy than tactics. Both were necessary here. I'm learning a bit more about tactics from others' reports. (Thank you for those!)
I must say that this played *very* differently than the first Always War epic. I'm quite impressed with the improvements in the AI's battle tactics. It's rather refreshing that cheesey tactics (e.g.: let the AI stifle itself in war weariness by suiciding with no real chance against my cities) don't work. Nice work, Blake et alia!
And thanks for the scenario, Sullla. I hope I can come up with something clever and successful for the next AW event.
