midsh civs.

Moderator: taco

ben55
Senior Member
Posts: 470
Joined: Sun Mar 08, 2009 2:49 am

Re: midsh civs.

Post by ben55 »

Yes Pelie because eec style of play is so dominate on aoc. If that is your big reason why it wouldn't work then wow you don't have a clue about aoc lol.
"Nothing is impossible, the word itself says "I'm possible"!"

User avatar
PeLlE
Nemesis
Posts: 708
Joined: Sat Nov 08, 2008 10:44 am
Xfire: thepelie
Lobby Username: [-Ts-] Pelie
Location: Bayern, Germany ^^

Re: midsh civs.

Post by PeLlE »

I'm still sick of your tank armor arguments so I'm not even going to explain my thoughts to you now since you will probly fail to understand or even think about them anyways :)

Atleast a bit of explanation:
If you can have a good boom with 1 food gathering upgrade in civ why would you add a second one instead of using the points for soemthing that gives your army more power/helps you getting another ressource faster? Imo it's quite pointless having farming and hunting&foraging in a civ. But well maybe I simply fail to understand why its good like some other people do on my eec mod sh civ :P
dreamwalker: i already clearly stated for all the english people that i dont play here
eeralf: ======???????????
eeralf: dont undersstand say it in street language
dreamwalker: fam mans already said im not gwarning wid yo shit on dis ting

ben55
Senior Member
Posts: 470
Joined: Sun Mar 08, 2009 2:49 am

Re: midsh civs.

Post by ben55 »

Yes... because I was arguing tank armor? I think you have your names that start with B mixed up. (but thanks for calling out my intelligence it means a whole lot coming from you)

I don't think you have played very much AOC to realize the differences between it and EEC for one you have morale EVERYWHERE, so eco raiding with a eec civ is actually quiet challenging if they aren't brain dead and know how to use group speed, so booming is actually not a bad strat or handicapping yourself. Also you are going to be producing from 3-5 Town Centers and 3-5 Barracks in the first 10f11 or so. It isn't as bad as you think it is.. on EEC yeah it is garbage I agree, but on AOC you can spend the food very quickly and efficiently, and not to mention it is basically 8 farmers(tech+civ bonus) = 6 hunters, so you have an infinite herd while the other guy to get the same result without his hunt assuming you ak'd his too would have to spend about 300 more wood and I am being generous on the cost.

It is a very flexible investment and the combination of it and expansionism make up for an eec style's advantage of iron mining in their civ. The big concern is weaker swords, but on AOC it isn't near a big of problem thanks to expansionism as well.
"Nothing is impossible, the word itself says "I'm possible"!"

taco
Civ Nazi
Posts: 539
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 7:46 pm
Lobby Username: taco

Re: midsh civs.

Post by taco »

the civ will only cater for strong/slow swords or fast/weaker swords.. i choose btd anyday as i find quantity over quality is much more important. the morale still works in ur swords favor, untill they get a hero usualyl its 12-18f11 if ur playing a sword slutter, by then u also hsould have 1. + as many swords + a much bigger boom. expan iron mines are only slightly slower then a settlements with ironmining so grabibng an iron mine and being able to keep producing army + cits is the aim of this civ. and i cant stress enough how either farming and hunting fail to b able to do this without each other. hunting gives u a boost in the early game when u need it most. farming continues the boost. to the extent which u are saving 1k-2k-3k of wood and food for needing more and more farms. i dont c how ppl(yes this is aimed at u pelie) cant understand this. i really recommend kb4 u add another post that u try the civ, ur theories are well simply theory's. im not saying ur input is zero but u might actually b able to understand from my pov and make a much better argument by doing so.

User avatar
Hello0
Senior Member
Posts: 221
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2009 8:44 am
Lobby Username: GoG_hΣ||øØ

Re: midsh civs.

Post by Hello0 »

i think civs depend on player

maybe taco can play this civ but pelie cant cus he is noob anyways :P

so why are we discussing civs. its like saying that metal and punk sucks. its just like that but some ppl dont accept it ._.!
I am sweet.

User avatar
PeLlE
Nemesis
Posts: 708
Joined: Sat Nov 08, 2008 10:44 am
Xfire: thepelie
Lobby Username: [-Ts-] Pelie
Location: Bayern, Germany ^^

Re: midsh civs.

Post by PeLlE »

okok ben you won shame on me lol

The tasnk armor guy was bonescorpion or however :P

Well my oppinion is still that woodcutting or iron mining would be a better choice
dreamwalker: i already clearly stated for all the english people that i dont play here
eeralf: ======???????????
eeralf: dont undersstand say it in street language
dreamwalker: fam mans already said im not gwarning wid yo shit on dis ting

taco
Civ Nazi
Posts: 539
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 7:46 pm
Lobby Username: taco

Re: midsh civs.

Post by taco »

iron or wood would b a better choice? adding either would take up just as much(if not more if u leave hunting in civ) points from ur mili points.. which previously u claimed would b much more benifical. woodcutting isnt an option as u need 2 sacrifice ur mix or 2unit combo.. (bali range). aka putting all ur eggs in the 1 basket, iron keeps bali range(or archer att/ or range) but has a slow start due to no h&f and will b outmassed early on, ur expan points will seem like a waste as u wont produce constant cits from ur tcs, which will destroy ur boom, and ur sword massing in respects to civs which focus on these 2 key strats . forcing u to play the catch up game, against both a boomer or a slutter. expan doesn't need iron mining. u get almost as much iron as a settlement with iron mining in civ. grabbing an early 2nd mine will b more then substantial.
by elimination hunting and farming ends up the logical choice.

Post Reply

Return to “Standard - High (SH)”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests