midsh civs.

[taco]

my newer civs go to viewtopic.php?f=77&t=1903

[LacRimoSa]

sword slut : cit hp bulding: cr, btd swords: att, hp, spd, cr, btd. seige: range phoph: btd eco: huning&foraging, iron mining.

Seige range is rather useless, better you add seige hp. Same goes for sword 4vs4 civis.

sword boom: expan, eco: farming, hunting&foraging swords: cr, btd, spd, hp(could b replaced for att) building: cr. bali: range

Doubt farming and hunting is needed. Just one. And maybe (idk if possible) iron or wood.

If you ask me, woodcutting+iron is best for 3vs3-1vs1 sword expan. Probably in 2vs2 hunting, due to the fact that you can mass sword easier at the begin.

Lg LacRi

[SlipKnoT]

farming and forage together is completely and utterly pointless

[taco]

i thought h&f + farming was pointless too, till i tried it and reliesed how quick of a boom it gives u, it allows u to focus on both mili and cits early game, instead of wasting ur wood on a farm, without a decent amount of animals i agree it is pointless but if u have a herd its great.

lacamosa play against a decent pt player without seige range and try and win, its rather hard, its also a decent late game combo swords+trebs, if i was to take it off and replace it i would probobly choose knight attack (take away proph btd also)

[PeLlE]

1st part of your post fails and with 2nd part I agree

[taco]

simply saying fails, doesnt help at all, if it fails tell me y. i have lost 3 1v1s in 8wks with all of these civs, 1 caboom vs swords(with uber lag) 1 to a counter civ(u) and 1ca slut on ca slut . not trying to say im the best there is, but im saying i no my stuff, and would appreciate actual critism. rather then fail. success

[Omega]

Seige range is rather useless, better you add seige hp. Same goes for sword 4vs4 civis.

I don't know why many AoC players have got it in their head that siege range is not good. I'd guess that it's probably because the setting where it's so obviously the best upgrade you can have for siege doesn't exist on AoC--Middle DM (without rules).

Either way, it's extremely good in a sword civilization, despite the fact you don't actually take full advantage of it most of the time (but then again, it's something you've purchased with 2 free points, lol). Here are some examples:

-Versus a priest tower player. If you for some reason let this person get their base well-established, they're a pain in the ass to kill. With siege range, your trebs can match their trebs in range, which makes eventually beating them essentially guaranteed, and speeds up how long it takes to win by a ton.

-In any late-game situation. Treb/sword is certainly the strongest and most versatile 2 unit combination in middle. You can add a retarded amount of backloaded firepower to your army with Trebuchets, which lets you take down units (such as heroes) and buildings very quickly. If you know what you're doing, this also is extremely good against the ever-so-popular CA/Ballista strategy seen on AoC in late game.

-In any mid-game situation where you really want to take out some buildings fast. If it's a wall or something, you can just use rams, sure, however, this is not always possible. Maybe you want to take out houses that are nested in their base in such a way a ram isn't going to get there and live? Maybe you want to take out some barracks while your armies skirmish. Et cetera. Used properly, a handful of trebs can win a game at this point, although it's rare to see it because conditions need to be fairly specific.

To be honest, I'd say that fully justifies the 2 points spent on range as opposed to having rams that take slightly longer to die for the price of 1 more civilization point.

[Pinky]

Its all a matter of opinion really, but I definitely side with Omega on this one.
Out-ranging someone gives you a huge tactical advantage and makes your opponent more susceptible to microing,
and like he stated before, for two points you cant choose a better Civ upgrade even if the game doesn't last long enough for you to introduce trebuchets - the siege range will help you in the long run, and in late game will help your team immensely.
Hi im pinky and i pretty much just restated everything omega just said. :doh:

[Ghost]

Again reiterating, siege range is an excellent choice for spending 2 points. They will dominate annoying priest towers with ease. If it so happens that both you and your enemy are making trebs, and one of you doesn't have siege range, those trebs are dead before you can even get a shot off at the other's, rendering them completely worthless.

[PeLlE]

Taco the first part of your post fails because it has obviously no sue to have farming and hunting&foraging in civ because aoc boom always is good enough to outboom/boom as fast as your enemy. It's obviously useless to speed soemthing up which is already fast enough if you can have more usefull upgrades in your civ which do actually support you instead of giving you 2k more useless food

[ben55]

I am not too adept at middle compared to others, but pelie and slip saying farming is bad is probably true on eec, but on aoc it is a whole different ballgame.

Like on EEC I doubt anyone could get the use of the extra food produced from farming+hunting, but on aoc you can easily spend that amount of food. I mean really with Expansionism you would spend that food quiet easily, and with expansionism the more food you gather the better you can take advantage of the civ power. If anything food heavy civs compliment Expansionism the best followed closely by wood cutting.

Siege range is like the best 2 points you can spend. I could understand hp for rams/siege towers, but siege towers are gay(nerfed on aoc), and rams well they aren't my cup of tea.

[PeLlE]

I'm not saying farnming is bad, I'm saying farming AND hunting&foraging together is a waste of civ points.

If you focus too much on booming and eco you'll loose to a medium palyer who's using an eec civ and eec style on aoc..

[Hello0]

sword slut : cit hp bulding: cr, btd swords: att, hp, spd, cr, btd. seige: range phoph: btd eco: huning&foraging, iron mining.

Seige range is rather useless, better you add seige hp. Same goes for sword 4vs4 civis.

sure it is in aoc cus there are many noobs going pts ._.!

Edit: sry didnt see that its already post

[taco]

I'm not saying farnming is bad, I'm saying farming AND hunting&foraging together is a waste of civ points.

If you focus too much on booming and eco you'll loose to a medium palyer who's using an eec civ and eec style on aoc..

since when is speeding up a boom a bad thing? more cits + more army = more chance of u winning, yes hunting becomes obsolete after 15mins, to some players this may feel to some players as a waste of points, but imo its done its job(about 3k food ahead of ur enermy) then farming takes over.
having this could give u an extra 60 cits(if its 3k food) over ur enermy, or if u prefer 40 cits and 40 swords, its not solely going to eco, despite being a boom civ. also in my start i said building another tc on iron and a 3rd rax before making a farm to keep ur mili high whilst which + morale is more then enough to fend off a sword slut
useful civ powers? ur given balli range, which suggests u make the bali sword combo which imo is devastating against everything but knights/cata(massed bali will still fuck them) even tho which either are easily countered without civ points and rarly used. it has all the mili ups it needs. if i was to change it i would take out h&f for bali attack or sword attack, but only when ur given a map without a decent herd
im kinda sick of these half arse assumptions,has any1 actually tried hunting+farming from those who has crtisied it? , i have seen a couple "i doubt" or "i think it would b useless" but i havent seen any "ive tried it and it doesn't work".

[peow130]

Your sig is fucking huge, and fucking annoying.
Change it.