Maximize your Strategy: Persians

[Yahweh Sabaoth]

This thread is dedicated to strategies for achieving UP as the Persians. It is meant to be for the inexperienced and pro player, for the tiny map and huge map enthusiast; in other words, for civ players of all stripes who might want to play as the Persians.

I'll start the thread off by asking a few basic questions:

1. What do you research first? What is your research path in general in the ancient era?

2. Do you use your immortals? If so, when, and in what capacity? (this might sound like a stupid question, but in my opinion, it isn't, not now that Medival Infantry are around)

3. What is your policy towards your neighbors? This depends on the vagarities of each individual game, but in general what tact do you take with them?

[Yahweh Sabaoth]

I'll now try to get the ball rolling by answering my own questions.

Bear in mind that I started this thread because I generally have a hard time achieving UP as the Persians, and I want everyone's advice, including refutations to my own answers! My answers are, at best, guesses, and I hope you all will point out the flaws in my reasoning, and contribute some better solutions.

1. What do I research first? I play with cultural linking on, so my neighbors are most likely the Ottomans, the Zulu, the Babylonians, and the Arabs. Additionally, the Germans seem to be around often. Therefore, all starting techs will be in play except for the Wheel and Alphabet, so I should aim for one of those. I pick Alphabet, because it seems to be more "valuable" trading-wise, and it leads to Literature, which is my top priority as I want to start building those cheap libraries to spread culture and pull ahead of my neighbors in tech.

Iron Working is obviously a priority as well, but with so many expansionists around, there's a good chance that someone will pick that up. It's not too difficult to trade writing, or alphabet + masonry, for IW, in my experience.

I find that REXing is quite easy as the Persians, but if you're starting on rich land you probably have quite a few neighbors, and you want to be converting their cities while in their infancy to your Persian empire! So build those cheap libraries and let your culture dwarf theirs.

Also, don't forget the Great Library. Not essential perhaps, but very valueble nonetheless, and easy to get ahead in the race to build.

2. When and how do I use my immortals? I do NOT use my immortals to wage all-out war. Why? They do pack quite a wallop, but for such a brief period of time, and they move too damn slow for my taste. Additionally, look who you're up against!

Babylonians - if they win a counterattack, their GA is triggered, making them a more formidable foe.

Zulu - same goes for the Impi, and they tend to be even tougher.

Ottomans and Arabs - easier targets, but still, if you want to attack with sufficient numbers, you'll have to use your whole GA producing soon to be obsolete Immortals, and if the Arabs or Ottomans have horsemen, they also have a good chance of fighting back.

But above all else, the main reason I DON'T use my immortals early is that I want to use them to trigger my GA, and I want to use my GA to build wonders and improvements, and if I've got my basics covered (libraries, temples, marketplaces) THEN I want to produce a fast-moving offensive unit - Knights.

I always build an immortal or two, and obviously they make great counterattack units in case the Germans or Zulus get nasty on you early on (which they did in my current game ). But better yet, I prefer to wait until I've got one or two of the starter medival techs under my belt, and THEN loose an Immortal on whatever foe (hopefully one that's far away and doesn't pose a real threat).

Now my GA will be in effect at the ideal time, and I will end up with Sistine's, Leo's and Sun Tzu's... and a much stronger domestic base from which to wage "real" wars.

3. What is your policy towards your neighbors? Simply put: out-REX 'em but keep the peace! For some odd reason, the Persians never seem to START near enough Iron, so I don't want to provoke any costly early wars. Sure, the industriousness will help me create a wartime road system, but still, I don't want the Ottomans or Babs overtaking me culturally while I put down a city here or there, only to have my crude Zulu or Arab neighbors pop up somewhere else to harass me!

At the same time, I'm bound to INITIALLY fall behind in tech. My warriors, no matter how many I produce, are likely to fall behind in tech to Zulu and Arab scouts. So, swallow my pride, take whatever trades I can get, and start building libraries. Eventually, the tables will turn.

That being said, the first victims of my eventual war machine will hopefully be the Arabs, and then the Ottomans. I don't want any Ansar Warriors or Sipahi to enter the game, ever, period. And by the time I've got the well-developed Ottoman homeland in my possession, the Zulu Impi and Babylonian bowmen will be no threat (most likely they'll have already triggered their own GA). The Babylonians must die of course - they pose too great a cultural threat, especially if they enter the Industrial age unmolested. The Zulu's time will come at my own leisure, unless they're big baddies and next to be taken down a notch.

Agree? Disagree? Let's hear your comments!

[Jon Shafer]

Sorry for not answering the questions, I guess I'm just a non-conformist. I'll try to throw a bit of everything into my post though.

Immortals on their own are too slow and too vulnerable, especially for long-distance wars. Persia is a good early warmongering civ, but you need a balanced army to do this effectively. Finding and getting horses is actually as much of a priority to me as finding iron. The combination of Immortals and Horsemen can give you an amazing army.

I often go for IW, or I will go for the Wheel first, simply because finding the iron/horses is a very good thing. I won't connect my iron yet, and stockpile vet Warriors, while trying to build my treasury. When the time comes (they attack me, or I see an opening), it's time for mass-upgrade.

During this time I usually focus on trying to pull off a super-REX, usually neglecting culture and letting my industrious workers pick up the slack. Once I'm ready, I let the Immortals and Horsemen fly, and that's that.

[Inverse Icarus]

Originally posted by Trip
I won't connect my iron yet, and stockpile vet Warriors, while trying to build my treasury. When the time comes (they attack me, or I see an opening), it's time for mass-upgrade.

bingo.

thats the major trick for most of the ironworking based UUs, although the celtic one is a costly upgrade.

[Yahweh Sabaoth]

Hmm. A lot of people would agree with this trick, but it seems to waste so much time to me to be building all those warriors.

How much would it cost to upgrade, say, 20 veteran warriors?

[Arrian]

20 warriors -> 20 immortals = 800 gold (40 per)

I do the warrior -> sword upgrade all the time (though more like 10) and the chariot -> horse one too. It works, Yahweh. It works wonders.

-Arrian

[Yahweh Sabaoth]

Well, I can certainly see it's utility, although it might set back my huge defense upgrade I typically do after Leo's... but if I've just conquered x # of cities with my upgraded units, I guess it sort of pays for itself, doesn't it?

[Arrian]

Yep.

The conquest of several empires usually costs me roughly 800 gold in upgrades (10 swords, 20 horse). With those forces, I can beat the crap out of a couple of civs, gaining cities, tech, slaves, gold, and maybe a leader or three. The leader, of course, can turn those conquered cities into a paradise via rushing the FP.

I build more units after the upgrade (horsies & spears, not swords usually, since the sword upgrade path sucks. My initial 10 are "fire & forget") to provide reinforcements, but the upgrade allows me to get moving much faster.

-Arrian

[Yahweh Sabaoth]

Thanks for the info.

I assume the treatment of Immortals would be the same?

[Arrian]

No, actually, that's the problem. I like using swordsmen as my first major wave of attackers (I'm not including ultra-early wars like settler bopping and other disruption). But there is no way I'm gonna do that with Immortals, because it would trigger my GA too soon. I absolutely hate despotic GAs.

Unacceptable, unless in extreme circumstances: despotic GA

Acceptable: Monarchy/Republic GA, REXing complete.

Perfection: Republic GA with Palace/FP setup just how I want 'em (and decently developed cities). This almost has to be an early medieval GA.

-Arrian

[badams52]

Haven't played the Persian's for a long time, since I played them early and often, I wanted to try other civs. But in my early games, I played the Persians most often.

I personally use all out massive immortals assault without any horses. For each city (usually I'm expecting 2 spearmen defense) a stack of 5 immortals usually does the trick (6 or 7 if you're worried or attacking a capitol), so I use multiple fronts (which makes up for the lack of mobility) and hit my neighbors hard. After the immortals have finished their clean-up, I usually kick back, relax and wait for tanks.

If I'm going to build immortals, lot's of em, and wipe out my neighbors early, I don't need horses - knights - cavalry and so I skip them all together and build city improvements.

For me, after the immortal era, the game is all but over, just a matter of which victory I want to claim.

In other words, I play them completely differently than Yahweh. They are my favorite early war civ and who cares about the baby's bowmen or the zulu's impis which are just target practice for my massive buildup of immortals. And research wise, I always let the AI research everything and trade for it 'cept literature which they like to skip.

[Frank Johnson]

The warrior upgrade path would work even better for someone like say, the Romans, who can build legionaries almost exclusively for every role untill military tradition / nationalism. ^_^

[Inverse Icarus]

Originally posted by Yahweh Sabaoth
Hmm. A lot of people would agree with this trick, but it seems to waste so much time to me to be building all those warriors.

How much would it cost to upgrade, say, 20 veteran warriors?

20 gold a pop with accel prod, 40 normally. so 400 or 800 gold.

if you have 20 though, you're insane, or have some of the best production i've ever seen. it's good for about 8-12 warriors. if you have that much production to burn, build a settler (your pop is prolly over 4 anyway), or some spearmen

[vmxa1]

Originally posted by Arrian
Unacceptable, unless in extreme circumstances: despotic GA

Acceptable: Monarchy/Republic GA, REXing complete.

Perfection: Republic GA with Palace/FP setup just how I want 'em (and decently developed cities). This almost has to be an early medieval GA.

-Arrian

Did I just hear Riders?

[Arrian]

Or Samurai.

[Yahweh Sabaoth]

A few more questions from the most frustrated Persian player around...

1. When does your Immortal assault begin, and against whom? Assume for the sake of this question that you're up against Ottomans, Zulus, Babylonians, and Arabs. Who is your first enemy, and why?

2. How do you deal with villages? Ha ha, call me insane, but everytime I pop a village as the Persians I get barbarians. Do certain civs have exceptionally poor luck with villages, like anti-expansionists? Forgive me if this question seems stupid but it's majorly upsetting.

[Arrian]

1) Depends. Who is closest? Who has the nicest land?

All things being equal, however, I'd hit the Arabs (no Ansars for you!). The Babs aren't much of a concern, since your Immortals can cut them to pieces (just bring a couple of spearmen too so the bowmen will be attacking spears, not immortals). The Ottomans you just have to kill before Siphai. The Zulu are typically crap, but if they get uppity, your Immortals can cut them up too.

2) Nope, you're just getting bad luck right now. When I pop a hut near a city, I make sure there is a unit that can defend the city if my exploring unit gets killed.

Remember: you cannot get a settler from a hut if you a) are building a settler; b) have an active settler; or c) have more than the average # of cities per civ in the game. Switch up your production to maximize your chances.

Hey, if your warrior survives, he might get promoted to veteran. That's a vet immortal (for a mere 40 gold) later on.

-Arrian

[Yahweh Sabaoth]

Hmm. Well, for whatever reason, in my recent string of short-lived Persian games, the typical hut has netted me a bunch of barbarians, nothing at all, or maps. No free settlers or good technologies for me... and this is true even of huts popped by expanding culture.

I wish I had Civ here at work so I could try out a few early Immortals wars... I'm so deeply skeptical of them. My inclination is to wait for Knights, and to use an Immortal around that time just to trigger my GA...

...it's also difficult to walk away from my all-time UP game as Japan (employing "Arrian's Deception" and coming close to a Domination victory) to Persia, outflanked as it typically is by expanionists and often bordering another scientific, industrious power.

But I will survive.

[Arrian]

I wish I had Civ here at work so I could try out a few early Immortals wars... I'm so deeply skeptical of them. My inclination is to wait for Knights, and to use an Immortal around that time just to trigger my GA...

Play the Ottomans, then. You get the same traits, and can use swordsmen without worrying about your GA. You definitely want to use lots of horsemen and/or knights, so you can do a Siphai upgrade.

As for triggering your GA pre-Siphai:

Pyramids/Great Lib
HG/Great Lib
GW/Great Lib
Pyramids/Newton
HG/Newton
GW/Newton

The best way I can see is to build either the Pyramids or GL and then capture the other. Next wonder you build, regardless of what it is, *presto* GA for you. Of course, that may not be an option.

So yeah, playing Ottomans gives you less GA flexibility, but it allows you to use swordsmen (very good early warfare unit) without worrying about the GA.

-Arrian

[Yahweh Sabaoth]

Yes, the Ottomans are the finer of the two S/I civs.

But this is the Persian thread.

True, the Immortal is not the finest unit, timing-wise.

In fact, the Persians in general I have found to be one of the more difficult civs to get your UP on with, though they generally start with lush land. I'm still unsure when the REXing/culture-building should end, and when the conquering should begin.

Were the Immortals to upgrade to Knights, I'd feel no remorse about using them early on, and moving them on, and one does typically with a beefy army: 1. Move into place, 2. Attack and Destroy, 3. Repeat (focusing on next target). After a while, the Immortals lose their punch, and they take much longer to move from one front to another.

[Frank Johnson]

When fighting any swordsman war...you have to plan ahead for their eventual uselessness.

Once it looks good and I'm winning a major war, I shift all my production to spears, or pikes if I have them. Then I replace the backwater garrisons of what I've taken with the spears and allow my front line troops to continue on.

So I won't be defenseless when new tech comes along, I make sure I have all the cities garrisoned with normal infantry, eventually.

Actualy that's why I was praising the legionaries eariler. Because they are just as strong as pikeman, you can keep them around alot longer. In my last game, they helped attack cities that had rifleman guarding them. I just had so many. ^_^

[Yahweh Sabaoth]

In so far as the best defence can be a good offense, I can see the use of one Immortal per frontier city. But I cringe at the prospect of losing so many immortals just moving them into place to attack... I know that this problem can be deflected somewhat by accompanying them with spears, à la an Archer rush. Still, I've grown soft on units with the ability to retreat... [sigh]...

[Catt]

I'm not really shy about using immortals early and often (same thing with legionaries). The relative advantage of the UU -- a 4-attack in the ancient age -- is generally too good to pass up.

Despotic GA's aren't my favorite thing in the world, but they are also not the horror that they sometimes feel. The thing is that you have to grow accustomed to exploiting the timing of the GA whenever it comes in the most efficient manner -- with the Persians, unless I'm playing a pangaea and the tech rate zooms forward very rapidly (so other govs are available quickly), I tend to view the use of immortals (and a despotic GA) a better approach than holding off on immortals until Republic or Monarchy is available. While a Middle Ages GA may facilitate the rapid construction of many high cost improvements like markets, cathedrals, or universities, a despotic GA generally means a load of immortals -- and a load of immortals generally means one's pick of the choicest land, the largest empire, and the relegation to the dutbin of history of any nearby neighbors. Even if you don't wipe out neighbors, taking 1/3 or 1/2 of their nascent empires early means: (1) you've REXed militarily very, very well, and (2) you've largely eliminated the threat of powerful neighbors for the remainder of the game.

In short, if you're holding back on immortals just because of the early GA, I heartily recommed you play a few games just through the early Middle Ages, in each case launching a furious immortal attack on your neighbors -- by the time knights come around, you might very well find yourself in a dominant position, able to take a pause and build infrastructure at that point (cheap libraries and fast workers!), or prepare your mounted forces for the next waves of activity

Catt

[Yahweh Sabaoth]

I like your style, Catt.

Yes, perhaps I am too stuck in my ways, and it's time for me to try an Immortal war or two or three. Now, how would you define your numbers?

In my current game (with about 5 techs left in the ancient age, G. Library 14 turns to go, and Monarchy in about the same amount of time) I've got about 10 cities, and most of my neighbors have the same or less. Needless to say, no one's infrastructure is that hot, except for mine, which is decent/good.

To my northwest are the Babs and beyond them the Ottomans and Arabs. To the East is China, and the Southeast, the Mongols and Zulu.

EVERY empire has ONE luxury that I don't have... and generally only one. The Chinese have no culture whatsoever. The rest are about on my level, or slightly behind. Militarily, they probably outstrip me, slightly.

Who should I take on first?

(I'm sorry, no screenshots - I don't have a screen capture utility and my PrntScrn button... well, I don't have one of those either. Suffice it to say I only have about 1 or 2 spearmen per city, plus 1 or 2 warriors as well - NO VETERANS and no barracks yet!)

[Catt]

Big grain of salt since no maps or further details, but . . .

The Mongol-Zulu confederation south is going to declare war on you at some point- they won't be able to help themselves. I'd keep a small force south to defend your border, but not with any real intent to conquer Mongol territory. I'd spend all available time building veteran warriors and then immortals, and then just romp over both the Chinese and the Babs, one after the other. Maybe the Babs first since it sounds like a lot of the Chinese cities may be auto-razed. Take a good chunk of each's empire. With your homegrown empire, and half each of the Chinese and Babs, game over. You can keep the Chinese and Babs as punching bags / leader farms for later, and you can deal with the Mongols and Zulu at your leaisure, if need be. I don't like having multiple borders to defend, but it sure sounds like an opportunity to cripple the culturally powerful Babs and the middle-ages-dangerous Chinese early.

Immortals in tightly-cramped land masses . . .mmmm [/Homer voice] You just have to resist the urge to build cheap libraries (and expensive temples) when the game presents a great opportunity to crack some heads early.

Catt

[Catt]

Originally posted by Yahweh Sabaoth
Yes, perhaps I am too stuck in my ways, and it's time for me to try an Immortal war or two or three. Now, how would you define your numbers?

Numbers are hard to come by generically. A conservative approach might demand 5 immortals per enemy city in the initial assualt. Which means an attack force of 10 or so probably works in most cases (with reinforcements cranking out of your GA-charged empire). This force of 10 just rolls forward, resting in conquered cities to heal, and then moving on to the next target, with reinforcements bringing up the rear. Make sure to have worker groups tagging along to speed forces to the front. I've launched immortal attacks with as few as 5 or 6 immortals at the start of a war, and I've also unleashed hoards of 20+. The key, it seems to me, is not to wait so long that you start facing pikemen and med infantry in counter-attacks.

Hope your game isn't too late for that with 10 cities already, the REXing done, and no barracks ( ) yet

Catt

[Yahweh Sabaoth]

[British Orphan voice] "Don't be angry with me, Catt, sir, I promise to build me barracks right away!"

Actually, there is still room to REX... in the jungles and deserts... so the AI will most likely keep trying to settle those areas. The Babs have already demanded Literature... I said 'no' and they didn't declare war, but that's pretext enough for me...

I think I can crank out at least 12 immortals in as many turns... that will be enough, if I'm clever, though I might have to learn a lesson about slow-moving offensives.

I'd love to be the guinea pig or "example master" for this thread, if someone could point me in the direction of a screen-capture utility... right-click doesn't work, and as I said before, no PrntScrn on my keyboard.

[Catt]

Originally posted by Yahweh Sabaoth
... right-click doesn't work, and as I said before, no PrntScrn on my keyboard.

My only (helpful ) suggestion is to buy a new keyboard.

Catt

[CerberusIV]

Just to be different, my current game as the Persians has put me on a small continent (6 cities) and isolated until all the other land has been taken. To make it even more interesting I have neither horses nor iron and no-one I can trade with has any spare.

I think a cultural victory has become the preferred option here - unless anyone can suggest a way out of this.

(Standard map, 8 civs, all much stronger than me by now, 150AD)

[Yahweh Sabaoth]

CerberusIV: my advice: ctrl+shift+q. But I'm sure one of the Whiz Kids around here'll have something better to say.

---

Oh, I have been waiting all weekend to post on this thread. I have discovered much, sahibs. But first,

AN OFF-TOPIC RANT/COMPLAINT

Why in God's unpronouncable name do the Persians never start near the Mediterranean civs when cultural linking is on? First of all, the Persians and Zulus certainly never clashed. Secondly, alright, the Persians historically did have interactions with the Indians, Chinese, and Mongols. And of course, the Ottomans, Babylonians and Arabs are all appropriate.

But Persia's most famous and consistent antagonists were Greece and Rome! Why is it that with cultural linking ON, Persia NEVER starts near the Med. powers? It's totally aggravating from a history geek's perspective.

RANT CONCLUDED.

Now, I wanted to report that I have been following Catt's advice over several games and have reached some tentative conclusions.

Persia as Warmonger

Though Persia's traits would indicate that it should follow a builder path, it's strong UU dictates that warmongering is also a valid choice for Persia. However, it brings with it a few drawbacks that should be taken into consideration before you take the time to put aside culture and start building barracks and Immortals.

First of all, GA timing couldn't be worse. I'm willing to bet that you'll not be a republic when you launch your Immortals war, and you probably won't be a Monarchy either. So your GA is going to come in the despotic era. C'est la vie; the Aztec player knows this isn't the end of the world.

Certainly, you can take down a peg 1 or 2 neighbors - maybe even 3 - using only your immortals and using your GA to produce nothing but more immortals, and maybe the Great Library and/or Hanging Gardens. By the time your GA ends, your empire will be twice or three times it's former size.

Additionally, this allows you to catch up tech-wise. Strictly REXing and building, I found myself with only a razor-thin margin of tech lead, and that's only after much whoring and cash dispensal, surrounded as I typically am by Zulus, Arabs, and at least 2 other expansionists. So don't play this game. Go to war, and take the techs you need. Chances are you'll get all of them.

If you produce a GL or two, you'll be in a strong position. Though being militaristic would help, certainly Industriousness alone will allow you to build the MRN you need to make it to the front and secure the cities you take.

But immortals are DAMN SLOW, so if there's chaos on your front, beware. I was sneak attacked twice by former allies and had to backtrack - painfully slowly - to stop advancing swordsmen and archers. This has retarded my progress, in terms of building up my conquests.

So Persia makes a good warmongering civ, but not a great one. You pretty much have to call in allies to defeat some of the more beefed-up civs (whom they are in each game differs of course), but beware those allies, because if you're sneak-attacked, your immortals might not be able to quickly move to defeat the offenders - never a problem if your UU is mounted.

Waging a horseman war is another option as Persia, which could work out well, even better than using your Immortals early. Immortals remain availible after Feudalism is developed, I've noticed... I began to excercize this option, but things didn't go my way so I restarted. Still, given the right conditions, using horsemen might be the fix you need if you want to wage war in the early game.

Persia as builder

As I mention above, the chief problem with Persia as a builder is the expanionist factor, plus the Ottomans. It's not hard to REX as Persia - in fact, it's quite easy. Persia seems to begin often on fertile land.

The problem is that you'll never get that far ahead in techs, and you'll often fall behind. Simply put, the expansionists will trade techs and contacts like nightclub patrons trade STDs, leaving even Scientific Persia in the lurch. Sure, come Chivalry time, you'll be ahead, but by little, and if the Arabs are still around, they'll be getting Ansar Warriors soon. Ok, you can spend a lot of time crushing them - but what about those Ottomans? They won't be far from Sipahi, then...

I guess I'm an UP stickler and that's why I haven't played one of my 2 active Persia-builder games much past the early medival era. If I could live with, say, Korea getting Leo's workshop, or the Arabs getting Ansar warriors, or the Ottomans surviving, then I'd have no problem. But Persia seems to lack the punch that you need for UP, hence unfortunately dictating early wars of agression.

This would be less the case if you're starting near the Europeans, whose UUs tend to come later or mean less, than the Asians with their sleiugh of ass-kicking Chivalry-based UUs.