25.01.2015 - 20:59
Is there any reason to not just take as many cities as possible? It seems like it gives your more money and lets you make more units. What if any is the downside? It seems like your opening turns should be taking as many cities as you can prioritizing capitals, is there ever a reason to turtle in the beginning turns?
Учитавање...
Учитавање...
|
|
25.01.2015 - 21:19
The downside would be defending all the city you have, or an enemy might take it, but you probably use up the reinforcement so he can't get reinforcement you didn't used up in that particular city. Expanding far away from your capital might be dangerous if your enemy is close to you.
---- Hi
Учитавање...
Учитавање...
|
|
02.02.2015 - 21:28
Taking as many cities is optimal for later in game, as they will grant you more reiforcement and income later on in the game. However, there are few players that choose to play a long game and rush, focusing on few cities and then immediately attacking the enemy.
Учитавање...
Учитавање...
|
|
03.02.2015 - 10:27
Practice good expansions, use all the units, if you think an enemy will stack a city in your expansion then try and send a stronger force. Alternatively be sure of the win and send all of your units into 1 other key city and think about taking other cities and attacking your opponent from their. Generally though in the first few rounds, especially when the opponent is close it is worth getting as many cities as you can with economic and production value prioritised first.
---- intelligence + imagination = extraordinary result
Учитавање...
Учитавање...
|
Да ли си сигуран?