Wow, new city of Azza looks super aggressive.
|
[Lurkers][no players] Gods & Kings? More like Clods & Dings
|
|
It's super aggressive in Civ4. It's pretty aggressive in Civ5, but at least not as much.
Civilization IV: 21 (Bismarck of Mali), 29 (Mao Zedong of Babylon), 38 (Isabella of China), 45 (Victoria of Sumeria), PB12 (Darius of Sumeria), 56 (Hammurabi of Sumeria), PB16 (Bismarck of Mali), 78 (Augustus of Byzantium), PB56 (Willem of China)
Hearthstone: ArenaDrafts Profile No longer playing Hearthstone. 
May 5th, 2013, 21:15
(This post was last modified: May 5th, 2013, 21:19 by NobleHelium.)
Whether it's meant to be aggressive or not (I don't think it is either) is not relevant. Azza has planted cities like that before in Civ4, and it has not ended well for him. This is Civ5 though, and the map is a lot more cramped than usual. He should be fine here.
Civilization IV: 21 (Bismarck of Mali), 29 (Mao Zedong of Babylon), 38 (Isabella of China), 45 (Victoria of Sumeria), PB12 (Darius of Sumeria), 56 (Hammurabi of Sumeria), PB16 (Bismarck of Mali), 78 (Augustus of Byzantium), PB56 (Willem of China)
Hearthstone: ArenaDrafts Profile No longer playing Hearthstone.
(May 5th, 2013, 21:15)NobleHelium Wrote: Whether it's meant to be aggressive or not (I don't think it is either) is not relevant. Azza has planted cities like that before in Civ4, and it has not ended well for him. This is Civ5 though, and the map is a lot more cramped than usual. He should be fine here.In Civ 5 it is hard to punish forward city placement because of the huge commitment you need to take just to have a try on a city... At least one siege unit, two melee units and one ranged for support... And you can defend it with two ranged units and a city. I think snowball is even more ridiculous in CiV5 than it was in CiV4. The difference between cannons, gatling guns and their medieval counterparts (trebuchet and crossbowman I think) is huge. Also hills and forest vision/range... screw that. (May 11th, 2013, 10:59)Kurumi Wrote: In Civ 5 it is hard to punish forward city placement because of the huge commitment you need to take just to have a try on a city... At least one siege unit, two melee units and one ranged for support... And you can defend it with two ranged units and a city. That early in game 7-8 warriors are enough. (May 12th, 2013, 02:39)Rowain Wrote:(May 11th, 2013, 10:59)Kurumi Wrote: In Civ 5 it is hard to punish forward city placement because of the huge commitment you need to take just to have a try on a city... At least one siege unit, two melee units and one ranged for support... And you can defend it with two ranged units and a city. Sounds like a huge commitment though. I just think that with rushbuying+terrain it is really hard to do anything good (means: would not put a player behind) with given tools.
Yeah, I'm not happy about my past behaviour either.
LOL @ Dave for not updating his thread due to his crummy start. This is very common; for example: rego in PB1 after he got nuked and his civ looked like an orange. I know its hard to update something when things are bad but it's still amusing...
(May 14th, 2013, 00:02)MJW (ya that one) Wrote: LOL @ Dave for not updating his thread due to his crummy start. This is very common; for example: rego in PB1 after he got nuked and his civ looked like an orange. I know its hard to update something when things are bad but it's still amusing... Nah, it's just RL, like he explained. He's stopped posting in other games too. That said I wouldn't be surprised if the crap start weren't a factor. +1 player paranoia count. |
