Request for opinion: curious about the massive villager concept
Ghost
of worker units.. the opponent would punish you easily and you would
lose.
Not so in AOK. It seems to NOT build a ton of worker units leads to a
loss.
So why is it in this game that it's so effective to build a ton of
worker units and win, when in so many other RTS games, to do so you
highly risk losing quite badly?
CrazyH
there
"Ghost" <w...@would.i.com> wrote in message
news:39aa81d8...@news.earthlink.net...
Lee Jeffries
is all about the economy. You need a good economy to advance through the
ages quickly, upgrade fighting units and produce fighting units. The good
players tell me: Never stop making villagers.
Ghost
<leeje...@home.com> said:
| I haven't played other RTS games, so I really can't compare. But in AoK it
| is all about the economy. You need a good economy to advance through the
| ages quickly, upgrade fighting units and produce fighting units. The good
| players tell me: Never stop making villagers.
Excellent point. This tactic has the same benefits in other games. The
main difference is, in other games, your worker units cannot stand on
their own at all, whereas in this game, they are damn powerful alone
with their TCs. So while it's a viable strat in any of these games, in
AOK (pre xpac), it's mandatory you do it, since it's hard to stop, and
if your opponent does not do it, you will win. In other games, if your
opponent finds out you are taking the risky booming strat, they can
make you pay dearly. The difference, I suppose, is the amount of risk
involved.
Imagine what AOK would have been like if only your initial TC could
fire (but the other TCs you make would allow you to garrison, just not
fire). Imagine suddenly if now you must provide an army, a Castle, or
Towers to provide defense for massive resource gathering (a.k.a.,
booming). Your initial TC is still a strongpoint, but haphazard
expanding all over the map is now a risky strat unless you build a
military presence as well. Thoughts?
Razer
machine behind the military (peons) will win the battle 9.9 times out of
ten. Plus the stratigic decesions as to what the villies should do and
when are vital. And with the diverse abilities of each civ knowing how
many villies are doing what and when is also vital.
This is not a game one can just load up and play if one has intentions
of winning. It does take an inventment of time reading and experimenting
to play well......win.
The peons are the fuel behind your army. As in real life.
Razer.
Razer
Take it from a professional rookie like myself. If you do NOT build an
army, castles, towers etc to proctect your economy workers you or done!
Just a few rams and game over if you can't proctect your TC.
Razer.
bubbag1
AI on moderate. Then I found this newsgroup and Mr FixIt Online and read at
least 200 posts before I "delurked". I have also viewed about 20 recorded
games from many different people, including Maimin Matty and Out4Blood. I
studied them and compared them to some of the whoopings I was taking from
the computer. I haven't played hardest yet, but can consistently win
against the AI on hard now!
So, what was I doing wrong? I would build 12 villagers (a habbit from ROR)
and then wait to advance to the next age. Then I would build about five
more and then start building my military. NOW, I build about 25-28 vills
and then upgrade. When I reach feudal, I have plenty of resources, can
build a couple of buildings and start researching castle. I know I am still
slow to castle, but a lot faster than a month ago!
BTW thanks everyone for freely posting helpful information and not making us
feel like morons. Whether we are or not, :-)) !
bubbag1
"Razer" <er...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:39AA9D20...@mindspring.com...
Ghost
|
| Take it from a professional rookie like myself. If you do NOT build an
| army, castles, towers etc to proctect your economy workers you or done!
| Just a few rams and game over if you can't proctect your TC.
|
Very true. But if you build a small handful of units to protect
against rams, the TCs take care of the rest, and it's boom city. :-)
Economically speaking, the attacker loses every time. So it's a war of
the boomers. The xpac seems to have changed it all, for which I'm glad
for. This game is definitaly one of the top RTS games out today, IMO.
PainMemory
Are you discounting a FLUSH? No rams, but you still get crippled if it is
run well, and if you only make a handful of military units you may not be
able to stop a flush, especially not with TC's.
Ghost <w...@would.i.com> wrote in message
news:39aaae70...@news.earthlink.net...
TheMoontraveler
LOL
--
TheMoontraveler
God always sees below the surface.
ICQ: 85830250
FarRunner
Pain is right. I have been there way too many time and been crushed because
I waited to build a few military units and relied on the TC for protection.
FarRunner
"PainMemory" <noways...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:en4Q4PS...@cppssbbsa02.microsoft.com...
dirk kaufmann
and attack the ram. let some vils still stay inside,
so your opponent will be frightened to loose
his army and might stay away from your tc.
let one vil stay behind your tc to repair it. if he
stands north of the, you might be lucky and the
enemy wont see him.
bye, dirk
"Razer" <er...@mindspring.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:39AAA24B...@mindspring.com...
>
> Take it from a professional rookie like myself. If you do NOT build an
> army, castles, towers etc to proctect your economy workers you or done!
> Just a few rams and game over if you can't proctect your TC.
>
[snip]
dirk kaufmann
and military. aok2 is a game were skills are needed
on both economy and military.
think of it like in real wars : without having the money
you cant afford the military to win a war.
tons of vils help in other things too. imagine you cant
defend your initial tc. it is wise to have other tcs spread
all around the map. but dont flee your vils in that direction,
if your first tc falls ! your opponent will then know
were to put you to an end.
bye, dirk
"Ghost" <w...@would.i.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:39aa81d8...@news.earthlink.net...