You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

Age of Empires / Rise of Rome / Definitive Edition
Moderated by Suppiluliuma, PhatFish, Fisk, EpiC_Anonymous, Epd999

Hop to:    
Welcome! You are not logged in. Please Login or Register.29 replies
Age of Empires Heaven » Forums » Age of Empires / Rise of Rome / Definitive Edition » The Civ That You Just Don't Play
Bottom
Topic Subject:The Civ That You Just Don't Play
« Previous Page  1 2  Next Page »
Caesar Constintine
Clubman
posted 06-06-01 11:18 PM ET (US)         
Well, if/is there was one civ, that you just can't stand to play? List it here, and explain abit if you wish

(some examples: of just what the techs are, they look bad, you've never really tryed them, they are too unbalanced...)

I'd defenatly say Assyrian, I don't like them becuase they have expensive units, but there are a lot of techs they don't have- which make up for it. I've also really never played them...

------------------------------------------------------------

As
Assy
Assyri
Assyrian
Assyrians d
Assyrians def
Assyrians defea
Assyrians defeate
Assyrians defeated E
Assyrians defeated Egy
Assyrians defeated Egypt

------------------------------------------------------------
Now, I want you to play them; in a campaign, DM, RM, MP anything, as I will. Post here if your thoughts about them changed


*The might of Carthage, victors from the Cedars of Lebanon to the Pillars of Hercules,
the great traders and the worlds greatest navy.
Prepare to be defeated!
*We are Macedonians, we don't convert that easily.

[This message has been edited by Caesar Constintine (edited 06-06-2001 @ 11:22 PM).]

AuthorReplies:
wedsaz
Clubman
posted 06-07-01 00:03 AM ET (US)     1 / 29       
Used to be assyrians, everybody played them better than me including the computer.
 
My first and only assy victory ever was just a few weeks ago, and I didn't really do much.
Phill Phree
Clubman
posted 06-07-01 00:21 AM ET (US)     2 / 29       
I find Persian and Palmy pretty tough and weird, and also Greek cos I am crap without some archers somewhere - just have to get better with cavs I guess ;-)

My Karma ran over my Dogma

AoEH | EEH | RoNH | IndividualsCAN

wedsaz
Clubman
posted 06-07-01 00:44 AM ET (US)     3 / 29       
Oh I forgot to mention why I suck with assy.
 
Pretty much all of their good units, their bonuses, and essentially the whole civilization is based on speed. That civ is *made* to rush villies, and I'm just not good at it.
 
Phill Phree:
Yea, persian and palmy play very differently. In rm carth, cho and greek have to be played differently in bronze too, although they don't have the same rewards persian and palmy can yield.
 
Ever tried hoppers+slingers with greek though? They might be useable (compared to other greek bronze strats), so long as you have some villies walling behind you as you advance...
AliensTookElvis
Clubman
posted 06-07-01 04:04 AM ET (US)     4 / 29       
As most people I say Greek, carth and Choson. They just plain suck. No chariots, no archers worth using in bronze, and no economic bonuses. Also they are gold dependent. They are very expensive to fight with in bronze, basically you have to go with cav/stonethrowers (Camels for Carth) and maybie academyunits but if you have a decent opponent he will just CA you to death.

In summary these civs suck in the bronze age and thatīs where most games are decided. Against good players you basically "have to" toolrush and I dont like toolrushing, therefore I dont like these civs.

Palmy on the other hand is one of my favourite civs to play with. On watermaps they can do amazing bronze-times with decent economy, and their army is way better than many other civs (fx the 3 above mentioned). Yes, you need to play them differently than other civ but if you learn to do that they can be a very good civ for teamgames (they get owned by faster civs 1v1).

Oh BTW, this presumes the usual default setts. I just noticed that you wanted us to consider DM and other setts as well as usual RM setts. I cant really comment closer on that other than stating the fact that Choson, greek and carth are good DM-civs and I wouldnt cry in agony if I got them in a random-civ DM

[This message has been edited by AliensTookElvis (edited 06-07-2001 @ 04:09 AM).]

Caesar Constintine
Clubman
posted 06-07-01 07:55 AM ET (US)     5 / 29       
Now, Try to play that civ, just one game... who knows you may just get stuck with them on random civ playing MP...

Greek- they have ballistas (to compisate for archers)- Cent,H.Cav, and Ballista combo.
Carth- They may be better than you think... They are one of my favs.
Persia-I think it's one of the best cav civs, they have every tech. They also have okay archers (good, but lack of range...) They are Slow, extremely but you must try to compinsate, use their bonus.
These three are also great naval civs.

All gold dependant civs are at a disadvantage, but you must be conservative while at the same time either trade or raid (enemys territorial gold mines) and trade for gold.

Till later


*The might of Carthage, victors from the Cedars of Lebanon to the Pillars of Hercules,
the great traders and the worlds greatest navy.
Prepare to be defeated!
*We are Macedonians, we don't convert that easily.

[This message has been edited by Caesar Constintine (edited 06-07-2001 @ 08:03 AM).]

AliensTookElvis
Clubman
posted 06-07-01 09:55 AM ET (US)     6 / 29       
Caesar Konstantine: I play default settings random civ very often, and I have gotten stuck with those civs many times. I can tell you from experience that greek ballistas do not make up for lack of economic bonuses or lack of archers. Yes Greek have an impressive iron age but unless you are very much better than your archerwielding opponent you wont be alive long enough to get there. Also you cannot raid with ballista and as I mentioned the game is most often decided in bronze and you donīt get ballista in bronze.

As to your comments about Persia. They are not really a slow civ, used correctly (and with luck finding your animals) you can tool and bronze faster than any other civ. However they do NOT have good archers, in fact they have the worst composites in the game aswell as the worst horse archers in the game.

[This message has been edited by AliensTookElvis (edited 06-07-2001 @ 09:57 AM).]

Caesar Constintine
Clubman
posted 06-07-01 11:03 AM ET (US)     7 / 29       
Agreed on the Greek stuff.

Persias archers, apart from not having the +2 range, what else are they missing? Oh!!! It's because of this that makes them not good!!! Right?


*The might of Carthage, victors from the Cedars of Lebanon to the Pillars of Hercules,
the great traders and the worlds greatest navy.
Prepare to be defeated!
*We are Macedonians, we don't convert that easily.
peter
HG Alumnus
posted 06-07-01 11:48 AM ET (US)     8 / 29       
Just about - you can also think of ballistics.
However, really good players should be able to do something decent with weak civs. Really good players who always play Shang and Yams - I'd say they're cowards.
BlitzkreigComin
Clubman
posted 06-07-01 12:05 PM ET (US)     9 / 29       
My main complaint with Persia is their economy gets worse as the game goes on. No wheel and a poor market makes it harder for them as the game goes on.

I usually will rush with Persia, and when I don't it gets ugly. A couple weeks ago I was able to boom to Iron around 22 mins and got EA and Eles going, but my lack of a Bronze army cost my team the game ultimately. That was against Player_Theta, Dana_ri, and REDLINE. I'm still mad actually I couldn't capitalize more with all my eles.

As for Carth... they are right there with Greek as absolute worst RM civs. No bonuses to help you see Iron. I've tried to play them like Mace using Hoppies as the main unit in Bronze. It comes down to the fact that you need a good Archery Range to live through Bronze against good players.

I cheer and usually win when I get:
Minoan
Yamato
Hittite
Shang
Mace
Egyptian
Assyrian

I love getting Palmy too, but I have to find my berries fast. Roman is always fun too especially when we play nomad Narrows random civs. But they have their problems in Bronze.

My lame civs I hate are:
Greek
Carth
Choson

That leaves a few civs in the middle of the road. I can win with these if I have a good start or I am lucky:
Babylonians
Sumerians
Persian
Phoenicians

Caesar Constintine
Clubman
posted 06-07-01 12:45 PM ET (US)     10 / 29       
I agree on that stuff, but I have had success with Carth in RM, I know that in any event, good econmic techs cannot fully make up for lack of an economic bonus (as true with Greek, Carth, and even the Byzantines in AoK.)

I've never really thought of any civs economy getting worse as the game goes on, very good though... I mean you know after most of the berries, stone, gold, and eles are gone some economys do get worse, unable to keep up with the compitition.

Peter I just noticed that (no ballistics), oouchh!!! Mega punch...


*The might of Carthage, victors from the Cedars of Lebanon to the Pillars of Hercules,
the great traders and the worlds greatest navy.
Prepare to be defeated!
*We are Macedonians, we don't convert that easily.

[This message has been edited by Caesar Constintine (edited 06-07-2001 @ 12:47 PM).]

wedsaz
Clubman
posted 06-07-01 01:56 PM ET (US)     11 / 29       
Back when I actually knew how to play, ...

I was successful with:
Mino - great FBs and navy, great compies, good farms, and good bonuses/units for defense and attrition.
Shang - Save 20f on 20 villies, can add up to a 12 min bronze instead of the slow-civ 16. Nice walls. No military bonus, but full pit and great selection of units.
Palmy - Must find food early - otherwise great econ, free tribbing, trade bonus means gold is no problem in late game (ever wood-starved an assy CA rusher with HHAs?!)
Persian - lightning fast, great selection of defensive units, strong iron - can't afford many units though, so you have to keep rushing and stay one step ahead.

Mid-range for me:
Hittite - mostly because of no compies, but I'm starting to be intrigued by their tool bowmen so I'll have to try them more...
Sumie - great farms and siege but slow to start up
Yamato - No camels/CAs, weak iron, econ not fast enough to make up for it... but nice warboats and cav/scout rush
Mace - great bronze and good iron but slow and no significant tool bonuses
Egyptian - great bronze and good iron but slow and no significant tool bonuses
Roman - great towers and iron, but weak bronze
Babylonians - good defence, but slow

Worst for me:
Assyrian - just not my type of civ, good rush units but poor attrition/defensive units
Carth - Their hoppers/camels/impies combo is, umm, useable...
Choson - Towers, impies, major iron power with swordsmen if you get there...
Greek - Maybe hoppers+STs? but mostly just bleargh.

Good memories:
Phoenie (they ruled in pre-patch) - just huge ok? as in 16 min iron while fighting a sea war and then pumping 20 eles at a time huge? They've been neutered I tell you! NEUTERED!!! IT'S A CONSPIRACY!!! *men in white force wedsaz into a straightjacket and drag him away*

Caesar Constintine:
Persia lacks ballistics - so does shang.

Persia lacks the wheel - so does mace.

Persia lacks some wood upgrades - so do palmy, mace and sumie.

Persia lacks coinage - so do shang, palmy, egypt, sumie,

Persia lacks some farm upgrades - so do palmy and rome.

Yet people play these other civs anyway. So why not persian?

Persia does have a full pit, and all government center upgrades aside from ballistics and aristocracy.

AliensTookElvis:
Smie has the worst foot archers in the game, followed by greek, assy, and hittite. Then come roman, carth, and choson.

Then comes persian. In bronze, their compies are missing one range upgrade - but they're still more than sufficient to stop CAs, believe me.

Persian compies are closer to yammy's (or shang's) than the latter are to mino's, yet people still play those civs.

peter:
How does lacking a government tech in iron affect persia's archers in bronze?

As for iron archery, both their HHAs and EAs are fast units with good hps which can run up close, so missing ballistics and a few range upgrades won't make that much of a difference compared to other things, which they *do* have.

I agree about the coward bit. I've seen great players win RMs with carth (lgn_kingtut) and greek (darq_oneeye I think) against good players with civs like mino, shang (pre-patch), phoenie (pre-patch) and hittite.

I nearly won in RM with choson once, but my teammates were no help at all so it was a 3v1 with me at the painful end of the whooping stick...

BlitzkreigComin:
I agree, persia's speed advantage must be used at every turn. You have to keep reminding your opponent that you're several minutes ahead of him by having a small party to celebrate... a few upgraded clubbers, a scout and some cavs, a few HHAs, that sort of thing.

Player_Theta, that name sounds familiar...

For carth you might want to talk to LGN_KingTut if you see him, he beat down mino/phoenie/shang/hittite with carth in RM regularly back when I was still playing. He might have moved on to AoK though, I don't know.

peter
HG Alumnus
posted 06-07-01 02:31 PM ET (US)     12 / 29       
wedsaz:
The prob with Persia - oh YOU KNOW THAT OF COURSE - is that they lack ALL of those Brz Age market techs, not just some. That makes more than a small difference.
Lack of range is a handicap for archers - try it against the CP and you remember why.
True about Shang missing ALL iron age govt center techs - but they crush ya before they get to Iron. The point I mae was simply that the archers don't get all techs to improve performance. And pit techs don't protect their archers from other archery, trust me.
wedsaz
Clubman
posted 06-07-01 03:13 PM ET (US)     13 / 29       
peter:
First, the range issue. The main reason it matters so much vs the cp is because it skirmishes, and humans can't do that (popov isn't quite human though). Against humans it only means which side gets the first shot, and then you have to consider the other factors. For example many civs lack compies altogether, and persian compies vs hittite CAs is still a victory for the compies even with -1 range.

Even if you're fighting a civ with superior compies such as yammy or mino there's the question of how many, which is an econ matter. The damage your cavs did in early bronze can potentially tip the scales a lot more than a 12.5% range difference, which is why math can only give you the pieces, not solve the puzzle for you.


The wheel only affects woodcutting by about 5%, forward building is usually done in tool, and persia is far from being the only civ lacking CAs.

The plow is rarely researched at all on wet map now, since it doesn't matter until late iron.

Artisanship knocks 20% off your woodcutting, that's what really hurts... but only once your opponent has it. Even with shang that's usually not before 14 mins, by which time you should have already pretty much won. The stronger the civ opposing persia is, the slower tends to be as well, giving you more time to rush the *bleep* out of them. Hittite won't have CAs and artisanship before 17-18 mins, by which time you're getting ready to pump out HAs.

So therefore, as blitz pointed out and I agree completely, the key to persia is to rush early and keep rushing. Luckily, their bonuses and tech tree are well geared for rushing.


Free Puzzle Games

UrMud - online community in an ancient history world
Danielthemaster
Clubman
posted 06-07-01 03:50 PM ET (US)     14 / 29       
Palmy are the worst, IMHO
Phill Phree
Clubman
posted 06-07-01 05:41 PM ET (US)     15 / 29       
Stating the obvious, but you can't talk about an overall civ beyond bronze IMO because;

It's all very well going on about how great a civ is overall, but with e.g. Greek - great siege, yeah, if they don't get done in before Iron. Any civ can have good points if you allow them to - if you stuff them before they can make use of their strong points it's game over and a very very moot point.

In my limited experience, Yam are perhaps the best all round civ, but what do I know ;-)


My Karma ran over my Dogma

AoEH | EEH | RoNH | IndividualsCAN

Danielthemaster
Clubman
posted 06-08-01 03:47 AM ET (US)     16 / 29       
I agree Yamato are the Best all round Civ.
AliensTookElvis
Clubman
posted 06-08-01 06:11 AM ET (US)     17 / 29       
Wedaz: Yes of course civs like hitite have weaker footarchers than Persia, but that wasnt what I was saying. I said Persia have the weakest composites and the weakest horse archers in the game. As you stated weak composites are better than no composites, and I use composites every time I play persia in bronze age. But I will pick sumerian or hitite archery range over persian any day. They might get worse footarchers (although Hitite haver better tool archers) than persian, but they do get CA and their horse archers are way better than the Persian ones.
wedsaz
Clubman
posted 06-08-01 01:27 PM ET (US)     18 / 29       
AliensTookElvis:
And then you have to consider time.

In RM, persa has the potential to bronze faster than
any other civ, since they have the fastest food source.
That means their compies could likely be up against
hittite's tool archers, and their horse archers
against hittite's CAs.

So what I'm saying is that while they do have weaknesses, they also have strengths that can make up for them... therefore I would consider them a second-tier civ, but extreme enough to have a serious chance against first-tier civs if you know how to use them right.

I normally don't play rush civs. Yammy, assy, and toher such civs are not on my list of favorites. Persia is even more extreme towards rushing, so I really suck with them, but the possibly benefit of having that trick in my bag are so great that I think it's worth learning persia anyway.

Without SF, best useable bronze times I've seen...
16 mins - hittite, egypt, mace, babs, sumie, ...
14 mins - yammy, assy, roman, palmy
12 mins - shang, mino*, pre-patch phoenie*
10 mins - persia stands alone**

* using the fastboom, which means lots of food but few warboats

** being a poor hunter, I've only been able to do 11 myself

Persia's strength lies in land-based rushing. It's advantageous to dock boom with them, since that allows you to maintain your speed advantage long after all hunting food is gone, but militarily they should be played like shang.

Shang's compies can't stand up to mino's, CAs to hittite's, cavs to yammy's, and warboats to any of those. How do they win? They get there first, and that's how persia should be played.

AliensTookElvis
Clubman
posted 06-08-01 06:19 PM ET (US)     19 / 29       
Are you seriously claiming that you can hunt your way to a faster iron. What kind of maps do you play? Unless you wanna run all over the map dogding CA there is no way you can find animals enough to do that.

And if I play shang vs minoan I will not get into any composite wars. I will just raid the s**t out of him and fight his composites with STs, cav and CA.

And BTW you can get usable bronze times below 14:30 without shorefish with any civ.

wedsaz
Clubman
posted 06-08-01 07:39 PM ET (US)     20 / 29       
AliensTookElvis:
Quote:
Are you seriously claiming that you can hunt your way to a faster iron?

No, I'm talking about fast tool and bronze times, 8 mins tool/11 mins bronze is what I've been able to achieve with persia. Theoretically if you really *really* like iron you could boat boom straight through tool and get there in 18 mins or possibly less, with enough resources when you get there to make a decent army, but I wouldn't consider that a game-winning strategy. Cavs at 11 mins are more effective than HAs at 18 mins, I would think.

Quote:
What kind of maps do you play?

Usually huge medit 3v3 w/default age/res.

And if I play shang vs minoan I will not get into any composite wars. I will just raid the s**t out of him and fight composites with STs, cav and CA

Well, persia can raid the s**t out of mino even earlier than shang can, so that's exactly what I would do with them.

Quote:
And BTW you can get usable bronze times below 14:30 without shorefish with any civ.

But with an 11-12 min tool, if I understand correctly...
I was talking about bronze times achieveable with 8-9 mins tool times.

I mean, just imagine the damage 3-4 scout ships could do in those 3 mins, and what 2-3 scouts could do on land at the same time... right after that you do the same thing again but with a dozen war galleys and 5-6 cavs, inflicted upon the same unfortunate opponent...

So my point is, who cares about missing some late bronze techs when your opponent doesn't survive that long?

If by some chance an opponent survives to late bronze, I agree he might have a chance... but I think there's about as much chance of greek surviving to iron against shang.

Now if I could just learn how to rush properly, not to mention remembering how not to get housed ever 4 villies/FBs...


Free Puzzle Games

UrMud - online community in an ancient history world
AliensTookElvis
Clubman
posted 06-09-01 07:00 AM ET (US)     21 / 29       
Firstly: When you say you use the huntingbonus so that hitite toolarchers meet composites and hitite CA meet horsearchers I naturally asume you mean you hunt your way too iron since its pretty hard to get horse archers before that. If you mean you dockboom your way to iron, well then just about every other civ can do that faster than Persia.

Secondly: I admit I dont play medit very much (I dont like that map), however Im pretty decent at math. I find it really hard to believe that you can do an 8 minute tool with at least 2 docks up be on his side of crossings before they are blocked, built barracks and in tool at least 1 stable, researched armour and attack, pump 3 scoutships build market at home and achieve an 11 minute bronze with economy to pump 6 cavs and a dozen war galleys. lets say you got boats enough to get the food ( but with that time you cannot have very many fishingboats) you will still not have enough real villagers to keep up with that wood drain.

And you will care about the missing techs if he has been mean enough to wall his villagers (some ppl do that you know). Then you have to fight his army, or if he simply gets help from his minoan pocketguy.

The point I tried to make before was not that Persia cant rush, Im aware of the fact that they can (even though Im not so sure about their abilities to pull of that 11 minute bronze with toolrush, that you described). My point was that they have the worst composites by all the civs that get composites and that they also have the worst horse archers. And if the missing thechs are range uppgrades and ballistics they really do matter and you should care (also missing some armour I think).

[This message has been edited by AliensTookElvis (edited 06-09-2001 @ 07:07 AM).]

peter
HG Alumnus
posted 06-09-01 08:42 AM ET (US)     22 / 29       
ATE:
Their archers don't miss any armour but apart from that I agree with you - getting Persia into iron straight from stone is pretty awful in SP games so in MP games it must be (almost) bloody impossible.
CenturionZ_1
Clubman
posted 06-09-01 09:38 AM ET (US)     23 / 29       
Who here has tried to play Babylonian?

CenturionZ_1
HG Angel
AoEH Staff

'In heaven an angel is nobody in particular.' - George Bernard Shaw
Age of Empires Heaven Agetoons About Me
peter
HG Alumnus
posted 06-09-01 10:36 AM ET (US)     24 / 29       
They may be even worse. Still, at least they got decent towers.
CenturionZ_1
Clubman
posted 06-09-01 12:43 PM ET (US)     25 / 29       
Still Persia rock at DM.

CenturionZ_1
HG Angel
AoEH Staff

'In heaven an angel is nobody in particular.' - George Bernard Shaw
Age of Empires Heaven Agetoons About Me
« Previous Page  1 2  Next Page »
You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

Hop to:    

Age of Empires Heaven | HeavenGames