Save Empire Earth

The best style of play is being able to rush, and then boom effectively without expansionism. A skill not many players posses.

Even if you weren't "rushing" why would you not send a few units just to scout/kill hunt? A very basic skill.

Texas Ranger wrote:In AoC you don't have to rush every game

I'm reading this as "In AoC people are so bad you can leave them totally alone and still win"

_DavE_ wrote:Or when you send your first units (3 sword, 2 cav) just send them near their iron/gold mines, if the circles are red instead of green, that's a pretty good indication what unit they're going. Surely i'm not the only one who knows this? Lol

that's what you usually do with your dog if you build one Although I do ^^.

Can't get my AOC working

1. Whats the problem?
2. What did you try thus far?

hi. I'm CarloS

CARLOS wrote:hi. I'm CarloS

the lagger

used to play mid sh alot -- big strat for me is ca rush with no expans. best in 2v2s when i played with peace or zealot we would do double ca rush on 1 person. then it's all micro army and constant attack with 2-3 groups on eco from different directions... the swords players had no chance

zos_nebula wrote:used to play mid sh alot -- big strat for me is ca rush with no expans. best in 2v2s when i played with peace or zealot we would do double ca rush on 1 person. then it's all micro army and constant attack with 2-3 groups on eco from different directions... the swords players had no chance

There's still Mid players, especially at weekends or at night.

used to play mid sh alot -- big strat for me is ca rush with no expans. best in 2v2s when i played with peace or zealot we would do double ca rush on 1 person. then it's all micro army and constant attack with 2-3 groups on eco from different directions... the swords players had no chance

It definitely didn't work in my 1v1s when I was swords. -.-

as dave said that it didn't work in his 1v1's; it should never work in any 1v1 when playing cav vs sword. If you have any decent tower placement and walling, the towncenter morale bonus for towers outside your capitol range should be enough to hold out long enough for you to train a nice group of swords. The rushing CA would work when you're significantly better than your opponent.

I'd go with expand swords or expand cav and turtle up instead of rushing cav without expands, unless ofcourse the enemy player has like 5 trees and spread out mines that walling/towering won't be enough to hold it. (But what are the odds of that?)

In 1v1 ca rush > sword expan. You get complete map control as CA. Unless the sword players map is really good you can easily deny his second iron. CA rush is left untouched while easily picking a part the sword player.. It's not looking good. There is a reason sword only players like texas started adding ballista upgrades in their sword exp civs.

Double CA rush in a medium sized 2vs2 is really good as long as the CA players are active, which is what nebula is saying they were. Is it better than sw+ca? I don't think so, but it's really good.

No idea why people underrate CA rush in AoC. Must have been tons of shitty CA players or something.

Idk, i still think you can hold out easily in an even match (meaning; if both players are equally skilled.) but it also really depends on the map. In most cases you can nicely wall parts off and tower some nice area's, this is not always the case though. Cav rush CAN be really strong if you can deny your opponent early on, but if that part didn't work out, the expand player can outgrow quite nicely.

however if the cav player is any better, it's gg :p

To put it like this: Me going CA rush vs a clone which is identical to me going Sw expan, I'd expect CA rush to win 9/10 times. First minutes of the game you wont have enough swords to put any pressure on the CA player, which means he'll constantly H&R you.

Also as CA you rally the first 4 CA to enemy, and before the 5th and 6th CA you'll have spotted what he's doing which means you'll basically never stop rallying. It's a crappy situation for the SW player. SW need all his swords just to defend which means CA will be untouched (can sneak out 2-6 swords to try get hunt/some eco killing but towers+group speed deals with that nicely).

Untouched CA rusher at f11 20 has 2 tc's and 4 gold mines btw. It's not like CA rush has no boom.

I was specifically talking about 1v1s tbh. Cav Exp > Sword No exp > Cav No exp > Sword exp. (Ofc this is simply just a theory)

Anyway, there's only one player who has beaten my swords on a regular basis whilst playing cav and that's Krass.

I have lost the odd 2-3 games vs players like Nafrayu and Arntzen.

And this isn't me being big headed or anything, but after years of playing Mid SH with swords I am pretty confident of playing swords vs Cavs. There's really only a handful (if that) of players that know what to do vs Cavs hit and run.

We'll see what the MidSH League table will say