Expansionist Civs

[orange]

Wouldn't an extra settler, rather than an explorer, be more representative of an expanionistic civ? I mean, an explorer is great...but it's not really expansionistic...it's more explorationistic.

Or would an extra settler be to valuable a gift?

[Pembleton]

An extra settler is too powerful. Especially since they now take away 2 pop after production.

Given that, having a scout may possibly be too weak, but I have a feeling that expansionist civs are stronger than most people think. Perhaps the bonuses from the barb villages are better than we think.

My most successful games in Civ were when I had a great start. There were some games that were already decided early since I had a 1-3 city advantage over the others. With ICS being crippled, and the fact that they have tested the game, I have confidence that they made sure that expansionists are not really that weak.

If you get some early techs, and some extra military units, you may be able to conquer a neighboring non-expansionist civ early and also be ahead of even a scientific civ (although they will compete more strongly later in the game when they start building improvements).

It depends on the player's style too of course. I think an expansionist civ shouldn't be a player who shies away from early possible warfare.

[orange]

it will be important to conquer early before culture is built up

[knott]

Originally posted by orange
it will be important to conquer early before culture is built up

I don´t think culture will be much of a problem if you only expand quick.

[Ironwood]

I really think people are underestimating the value of an early explorer. If the explorer is still tied to the same point on the tech tree as it was in Civ2 (Seafaring) then think about what a civ that *starts* with an explorer can do!

First off, no waiting for horseback riding (or the wheel) to start exploring well. Rather than having to wait for a guy that can *sometimes* go two spaces (or having a warrior run around one space at a time) you get a guy, from the start, that can go three spaces, *anywhere* (if the mechanics are the same as Civ2... and yes, I know they're not).

This means you get all the goody huts. And the weakness of opening huts early in the game is that, as often as not, your exploring horseman get's killed by barbarians. This won't happen often, if at all, with an expansionist culture. I'm willing to bet the "peaceful village" result will be more frequent.

So, you get early intelligence to know *exactly* where to place your settlers, and extra villages around the countryside, an early tech advantage, a nice army of unsupported units, good stuff. And you get these before the others can.

Just use that advantage while you have the chance.

[player1]

With increased benefits from Goody huts, Explorer can be even more powerfull than settlers.
Like gettind one or two free Settlers in the wildness.

In fact Expansioinst ability is a powerfull one, but other abilities are as good also,
exept a Religious which looks to me a little weak (a mean scientific also gains extra culture through scientific buildings)

[red_jon]

Let the expanionists have an extra settler. I'm gonna play as the English and need the bonus

(BTW, I'M KING! WOOHOO!)

[LoD]

I second Ironwood and player1. The explorer at a start is really a powerful unit. First of all, you can increase the power of your empire thanks to higher acces to goody huts (BTW, I wonder will there be free settler and/or city goody huts in Civ3). Secondly, you have the edge when it comes to planning your expansion - you now which territories around you are potentially prosperous, or which are important from a strategic standpoint.

LoD

[Mankind]

with explorer [not mentioning about huts]
... one can explore land , search for other civs; then from once to think over this how to conquer them


and once i conquer them and all land wil my own and only my
I can go conquerer more and more, islands ,continents all will be my !!!!!! AAAAARRRRRGGHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!

[August Borms]

definitely an extra explorer, it'll give us something to do while waiting for the city to build the first unit

[lockstep]

Explorer. Nothing is better than knowing where my next five cities will be founded.

[joer]

An extra settler would be way too powerful, I believe. Since early game strength is determined mainly by the number of cities, it'd just double the strength of an expansionist civ.

My guess is that an explorer is a fair advantage. Since scouts (0-0-2) are availible from the start (see
Korn's list of units thread ), most folks will probably first build a bunch of scouts to explore their surroundings anyways. And since it'd take much longer until they can build their first settler, they'd know already their environment before placing their second city.

But still, an explorer is faster, most likely (I'd guess 0-0-3, perhaps even no terrain slowing down ), it'd be a nice bonus for getting to know other civs early, spying on them, popping huts faster, etc.