Unify Victory over Conquest or Allied victory

[Starcomet1]

So I noticed that after lighting two beacons, the entire world declares war on me. While I am a very defensive player, it is difficult to fight against 3+ nations all attacking a city at once. It also seems like the AI will try to build and light beacons, but after getting one or two they just say "Screw it" and start attacking other nations and winning via conquest.

What is the best way to win the Unify victory without having to deal with the whole world coming at you? Is it better to just do a conquest or allied victory against the AI?

[Starcomet1]

I have been playing with city founding off and like how it slows the game down, but it makes it take longer to build racial happiness and governance since I usually only have one city for a particular race.

[Iguana-on-a-stick]

The AI tries to win via unity... but when it realises it is losing, it tries to capture your beacons instead. Smart move on the part of the AI.

The trick with unifier victory, as with all other victories, is to be strong enough to fight the AI. Which means having a big empire with big armies. Sorry, there are no other ways about it.

Personally, I rarely play with the Unifier victory, as I don't like how the AI isn't subject to the neutral invasions, and I don't like getting huge morale penalties as all AIs immediately build beacons. (Thanks to emperor AI happiness, income and production bonuses.)

With the Seals of Power victory, though, you can win a more defensive one: simply make sure NOT to get ahead of the AI. Capture one seal, maybe two if the AI has more points than you, but make sure somebody ELSE is the first to get a high score.

Then, the AI will all gang up on that player (who happens to be an AI himself, but the AI doesn't discriminate) and you will be ideally positioned to snatch a few more seals and start accumulating points. Of course, the AI will then probably attack you too, but it will be a free for all instead of everybody ganging up on you, and you should be able to defend your seals long enough to win.

Plus, with a bit of luck, the initial top dog AI will ally with you after getting attacked by everybody else.

[Starcomet1]

Originally posted by Iguana-on-a-stick:

The AI tries to win via unity... but when it realises it is losing, it tries to capture your beacons instead. Smart move on the part of the AI.

The trick with unifier victory, as with all other victories, is to be strong enough to fight the AI. Which means having a big empire with big armies. Sorry, there are no other ways about it.

Personally, I rarely play with the Unifier victory, as I don't like how the AI isn't subject to the neutral invasions, and I don't like getting huge morale penalties as all AIs immediately build beacons. (Thanks to emperor AI happiness, income and production bonuses.)

With the Seals of Power victory, though, you can win a more defensive one: simply make sure NOT to get ahead of the AI. Capture one seal, maybe two if the AI has more points than you, but make sure somebody ELSE is the first to get a high score.

Then, the AI will all gang up on that player (who happens to be an AI himself, but the AI doesn't discriminate) and you will be ideally positioned to snatch a few more seals and start accumulating points. Of course, the AI will then probably attack you too, but it will be a free for all instead of everybody ganging up on you, and you should be able to defend your seals long enough to win.

Plus, with a bit of luck, the initial top dog AI will ally with you after getting attacked by everybody else.

I was wondering if the AI gets attacked by neutrals as well when they light beacons and now that I know they do not it sucks! I like the unifier victory, but it seems best to play against one other AI or against human players. I will try the seals victory next as I was thinking about playing that too.

I always play Theocrat and thus have a class suited for defensive play given all of the buffs, healing, and debuffs but when there are stacks of armies attacking your 4-5 stacks in your city, attrition will eventually rule in their favor.

[Iguana-on-a-stick]

Originally posted by Starcomet1:

I was wondering if the AI gets attacked by neutrals as well when they light beacons and now that I know they do not it sucks!

Good news: with the Seals victory, the neutrals attack both player and AI. Much more fair. Plus the AI handles it better in genearl.

I always play Theocrat and thus have a class suited for defensive play given all of the buffs, healing, and debuffs but when there are stacks of armies attacking your 4-5 stacks in your city, attrition will eventually rule in their favor.

Theocrat units are good at defense in tactical battles, but in a strategic sense I'd actually say the healing makes the them good at offensive play. Healing means you can push the attack much harder, since you won't take damage. Same for the high-defense crusaders and resurging exalted. Ideally suited for an aggressive crusade aimed at the enemy's throat.

Dreadnought, meanwhile, are great damage dealers in tactical combat, but in a stategic sense would be better at defense, since they have all that great (but slow-ish) artillery, and parking units in your cities means you can repair them easily.

That said, playing defense like this is not a particularly GOOD strategy in this game. Aggressive expansion is much, much better. (Yes, also for dreadnoughts, contrary to what I just said.) And doesn't lead to boring slug-fests in the late-late game.

On lower difficulties it is possible to play defensively, but on higher ones the AI gets too many bonuses for it to really work. And even on lower difficulties the AI can and will outproduce you if you don't expand, though it's programmed not to get ahead too far.

The Seals victory is the exception, because it enables defensive tactics with a clear end-game in sight. You'll have some pretty exciting wars, but it will only last a few dozen turns, not a hundred. And it doesn't matter if the AI can out-produce you in the long run, as long as you can hold on long enough to eke out a victory. (I do recommend turning the number of required seal charges up to maximum, though, otherwise the game goes too fast.)

[Starcomet1]

Originally posted by Iguana-on-a-stick:

Originally posted by Starcomet1:

I was wondering if the AI gets attacked by neutrals as well when they light beacons and now that I know they do not it sucks!

Good news: with the Seals victory, the neutrals attack both player and AI. Much more fair. Plus the AI handles it better in genearl.

I always play Theocrat and thus have a class suited for defensive play given all of the buffs, healing, and debuffs but when there are stacks of armies attacking your 4-5 stacks in your city, attrition will eventually rule in their favor.

Theocrat units are good at defense in tactical battles, but in a strategic sense I'd actually say the healing makes the them good at offensive play. Healing means you can push the attack much harder, since you won't take damage. Same for the high-defense crusaders and resurging exalted. Ideally suited for an aggressive crusade aimed at the enemy's throat.

Dreadnought, meanwhile, are great damage dealers in tactical combat, but in a stategic sense would be better at defense, since they have all that great (but slow-ish) artillery, and parking units in your cities means you can repair them easily.

That said, playing defense like this is not a particularly GOOD strategy in this game. Aggressive expansion is much, much better. (Yes, also for dreadnoughts, contrary to what I just said.) And doesn't lead to boring slug-fests in the late-late game.

On lower difficulties it is possible to play defensively, but on higher ones the AI gets too many bonuses for it to really work. And even on lower difficulties the AI can and will outproduce you if you don't expand, though it's programmed not to get ahead too far.

The Seals victory is the exception, because it enables defensive tactics with a clear end-game in sight. You'll have some pretty exciting wars, but it will only last a few dozen turns, not a hundred. And it doesn't matter if the AI can out-produce you in the long run, as long as you can hold on long enough to eke out a victory. (I do recommend turning the number of required seal charges up to maximum, though, otherwise the game goes too fast.)

Thank you for the continued advice! I just do not like brining most of my army and leaving cities and vassal defenseless with one or two stacks. You are right though that thanks to Resurgence and Rebirth, I could suicide run with some of my units.

[Iguana-on-a-stick]

One or two stacks is hardly defenseless. Typically, half a stack of ranged troops/priests is plenty defense for a city that's not on the front lines, and a single stack is all I put elsewhere unless a big attack is imminent.

Vassals, meanwhile, are supposed to defend themselves. That's why you make them vassals instead of conquering/buying them up outright. Sure, they'll lose to a determined enemy attack, but then you can simply counterattack and take over the city.

Scouting, tough, is crucial to defense. You won't need such a big defensive force if you know where the attack is coming from. Build watchtowers, park Cherubs/Crows/Spy Drones/Zephyr Birds above mountains or water near your borders, put forts in chokepoints. These things give you the warning time you need to respond to an attack.

The key to the economy in this game is to realise that soldiers who aren't being used are costing you money every turn. And soldiers in a garrison are almost never being used. Soldiers exploring and looting treasure sites, meanwhile, earn their keep many times over. And as long as you build enough soldiers, there will always be some nearby to rush back in case your cities come under attack.

[Starcomet1]

I like using priest for humans instead of archers and Saints for Archons/highmen for my ranged support. Are two stacks of them garrisoned in a city a good defense? I know when I first played I did a very good job, but it has been so long I forgot strategies and that was on squire then. I am playing on knight now.

I usually use cherubs to scout and spy on enemies, but I will use watchtowers more often as well.

[Iguana-on-a-stick]

Originally posted by Starcomet1:

I like using priest for humans instead of archers and Saints for Archons/highmen for my ranged support. Are two stacks of them garrisoned in a city a good defense? I know when I first played I did a very good job, but it has been so long I forgot strategies and that was on squire then. I am playing on knight now.

I usually use cherubs to scout and spy on enemies, but I will use watchtowers more often as well.

Saints/Archons/Highmen? Those aren't in AoW3... you mean the Evangelists? Human Evangelists, unlike most others, can shoot spirit rays, but they're too expensive to be used as garrison.

Human priests are an excellent garrison unit. They're cheap enough and provide a ton of healing, and if you can get them up to gold medal they can daze enemies for two turns. (But garrison units won't get there.)

But two stacks is way, way too much.

Two stacks of priests and Evangelists (say one of each) would cost you 144 gold per turn in maintenance.

A metropolis has a base income of 40 gold. Raise happiness to max and have 2 gold mines in your territory, and that increases to 90 gold. That is a pretty good city, and you are STILL operating at a loss from garrisoning costs alone! You have to be producing Merchandise to more or less break even. So you can't then build any structures, or any additional units for offensive campaigns.

The only reason to have that many defenders is if you know you'll be attacked by a big force. In a city with a unity beacon it's a fine idea to have that many defenders. Elsewhere? No.

In addition, relying on priests and evangelists is risky, as all your ranged damage will be of the Spirit type. (This is a weakness of human theocrat in general: you go all in on spirit damage.) Great if you're attacked by the Undead. But if you're attacked by a Dreadnought, you'll be in deep trouble, as machines are immune to spirit. Units with Strong Will are likewise immune.

For a city in the interior of your empire, defense by half a stack will be plenty. A priest and 2 archers will keep a sneaky scout from taking over, and might stop weaker Global Event attacks. (Rise of the Fire Rogue, etc.) 2 priests if you're feeling insecure. You can send reinforcements if a tougher enemies approaches.

For a city near the front, you can use one stack as defense. 2 priests, 2 crusaders, 2 archers should hold off pretty much everything. The priests can keep healing the crusaders forever, and in guard mode the crusaders are nearly unkillable. The archers are just there as cheap ranged damage. (You could use martyrs instead to protect the crusaders even more.)

This stack would cost just 40 gold upkeep per turn. So a decently sized city can easily pay for it.

[Starcomet1]

Originally posted by Iguana-on-a-stick:

Originally posted by Starcomet1:

I like using priest for humans instead of archers and Saints for Archons/highmen for my ranged support. Are two stacks of them garrisoned in a city a good defense? I know when I first played I did a very good job, but it has been so long I forgot strategies and that was on squire then. I am playing on knight now.

I usually use cherubs to scout and spy on enemies, but I will use watchtowers more often as well.

Saints/Archons/Highmen? Those aren't in AoW3... you mean the Evangelists? Human Evangelists, unlike most others, can shoot spirit rays, but they're too expensive to be used as garrison.

I am using a mod that adds the Archons in the game and gives them the same units they had in AoW2 (They are my favorite race in AoW). I hardly use evangelist despite their ranged attacks for humans, because of their higher maintenance. I will have a stack that is 2 Priest, 2 crusaders, and 2 Archers. I usually end up with multiple cities as vassals and can amass a large army.

[Starcomet1]

For offensive, I like to use crusaders, knights, and exalteds. I try to give each stack one shrine of smiting and/or an Archangel if I can afford it.