Post recs. Till then I think it's way too easy to stop. If you gave me 12 mins as Brits even if I didn't FF or rush, my boom would be insane by then...

[This message has been edited by egel (edited 04-16-2007 @ 03:21 AM).]

Doc Nefarious writes:

The build order as described above works only this smooth if your opponent leaves you alone for the about 12 minutes you need to pull it off.

I don't think thats a realistic scenario. Myself, personally, Ive seen turtling less and less recently, so to think youre not going to have any interaction with your opponent for 12 mins is simply unreasonable. Early on your staking the integrity of the economy, and therefor the integrity of you strat on the defensive backs of 4 hussars ~ 8 pikes or 4 pikes /4xbows. Then while in fortress you make two military shipments of 5 non upgraded hussars and 2 falcs. The falcs should help against the heavy infantry your opponent has undoubtedly made to deal with the hussars but I dont think it would be enough stave off a full fledged attack from any opponent that has been making military units at a much more constant rate then you.

I think being left alone for 12 minutes would be really hard, plus if your playing anybody who rushes or booms you will have one heck of a problem.
This strat will not work in most circumstancs because if your enemy manages to fend of your attack then you will be left with a crappy post Revolution ECO.
Plus you did not mention making any settlers in age 1.

Most of this stuff has its strongest applications in treaty because that is where safe until 10 min is ok.

I perfer Dutch FI to Spain FR.

treaty would obviously make more sense, I guess I was thrown off by;

Doc Nefarious writes:

A Fast Revolution strategy can be relatively easily forced off track by an early attack.

I think its good like he said dont be stingy with the shipments. 2 falcs 4 hussar age up + 5 shipment tc fire dogs. would hold off most rushes falcs tear up infintry rshes. then u age again 2 falcs from age 4 falcs could hold loads of inf and hopefully your hussar OR 8 pikes shipment could keep thems afe from cav. as far as im concern it SOUNDS viable but a rec or 2 would be nice
And i like that u are making use of revaloution it seems almost pointless add on to the expansion pack.

Okay sorry I misunderstud.
Because of the same reason DONofCHRON did not understand.

to think youre not going to have any interaction with your opponent for
12 mins is simply unreasonable.

It seems I did not make myself clear enough. Of course I do not expect to be left alone for twelve minutes. (Well, actually I did when I first came up with this kind of strategy, but I had a good reason to do so, and that is another story anyway.) This seemed so elementary that I did not think I would have to explicitly mention it. To me, a build order is what I aim for, under ideal circumstances, and then I adapt as necessary. As I said, you have to scout well, and bail out if necessary. If you see your opponent massing heavy infantry or whatever else, "simply" build the appropriate counters and start fighting back. The deck provides enough flexibility to do that, and explorer plus dogs plus TC fire plus minutemen are more than capable of taking care of the occasional raid or a "probing" rush.

Any strategy can be countered if you know exactly what to expect. It is easy to read a strategy and then say "Oh, if you do this, I will do that and win", but it is also completely beside the point. Of course if you knew from the start that someone was going for a fast revolution, leaving you alone for 12 minutes, you could boom like hell. But how will you know that? How can you be sure the Spaniard is not going to switch plans and come after you in Age 3 anyway? I doubt that many people will expect a Spanish player to give them enough time for an undisturbed boom, often they will be preparing for a much earlier attack. So quite a few opponents probably will be turtling.
(I actually lost a game to a (Argentine) fast revolution this way, trying to get a good balance between economy and defensive capability, and then not being able to build up enough military quickly enough when the opponent went to Age 4 and revolted ten seconds later.)

Once again, good scouting and quick thinking/adapting is the key here. Old military wisdom: No plan ever survives the first enemy contact. If you stick to the plan no matter what, you deserve to lose!

Plus you did not mention making any settlers in age 1.

Ok, I'll add that as well. Seems I cannot get too elementary here...

if your enemy manages to fend of your attack then you will be left with a crappy post Revolution ECO

Another old military rule: Never start a fight unless you know you are going win!

Doc you got some nerve trying to undermine my intelligence here.

this quote I took from your most recent post;

Nefarious writes:

It seems I did not make myself clear enough. Of course I do not expect to be left alone for twelve minutes.

and this quote I took from your first post;

Nefarious writes:

The build order as described above works only this smooth if your opponent leaves you alone for the about 12 minutes you need to pull it off.

Really I think its pretty audacious on your part to be telling people they should be understanding "elementary points," when you can not even refrain from contradicting yourself. Since youre so into military history here, you reminded of Napoleon Bonaparte saying; "never ascribe to malice, that which can be explained by incompetence." I suppose if I was notorious for seemingly habitual self-contradiction Id fly off the handle as well.

[This message has been edited by DONofCHRON (edited 04-17-2007 @ 09:48 AM).]

Another old military rule: Never start a fight unless you know you are going win!

Actually there is no garantey that you will win.

Ok, I'll add that as well. Seems I cannot get too elementary here...

I feel the same as DON please make your self clear the first time.

[This message has been edited by Frederick Bill (edited 04-17-2007 @ 10:41 AM).]

Frederick, do you even TRY to read the posts we make regarding your BBcode usage?

you got some nerve trying to undermine my intelligence here

No reason to fly off the handle. Actually, I was trying to be polite by not simply saying "You got that wrong."

Really I think its pretty audacious on your part to be telling people they should be understanding "elementary points," when you can not even refrain from contradicting yourself.

Ok, let's try again:

I don't see a contradiction. I explained what the ideal build order would look like, and I explained that you cannot expect it to work, for the very reason of it being "ideal". That's why, as I stated numerous times, scouting and being flexible are so important if you even think about pulling off this strategy, and why adapting to the situation at hand is so important.

Think of it as a NASCAR race: Basically, all you do is drive to the end of the straight and turn left, but in reality there is a little bit more to it...

If you would try to understand what I'm saying instead of trying to be "right" the discussion would be much easier. But I will take your advice and not ascribe to malice what can be explained by incompetence.

Can we get back to discussing the strategy now?

No reason to fly off the handle. Actually, I was trying to be polite by not simply saying "You got that wrong."

I didn't get that wrong though, but was merely following precisely what you said.

I don't see a contradiction.

Here, Ill point it out for you. again.

1st post writes:

The build order as described above works only this smooth if your opponent leaves you alone for the about 12 minutes you need to pull it off.

2nd post writes:

It seems I did not make myself clear enough. Of course I do not expect to be left alone for twelve minutes.

If you dont expect to be left alone for 12 mins then what is the purpose of your first build order? If youre saying your initial BO for this stratgey is only viable if you are left alone for 12 mins, and then say you dont expect to be left alone for 12 mins, wouldnt that essentially make your entire strategy therefor unviable?

I guess I didnt make myself clear. What I should have said was, I think the revolution feature is damn near pointless, it requires a very controlled environment to actually achieve and I dont feel you are looking at a better position to win the game after the fact then if you had not revolted all together. As easy as it is for someone to say, "if you do this, Ill counter it like this and beat you", its just as easy for someone to post a strategy and give you the whole, "it works as long as you dont see this, this or this, and if you do you need to switch gears and basically implement a strategy that is nothing like your original."

Post a rec, prove me wrong, but until then, I think youre trying to do too much with too little.

Let me explain DON

The build order as described above works only this smooth if your opponent leaves you alone for the about 12 minutes you need to pull it off.

This smooth means it can work if you are attacked, but it works best if you are left alone for 12 minutes. No contradiction with:

It seems I did not make myself clear enough. Of course I do not expect to be left alone for twelve minutes.

let me explain,LordRich;

with this "strategy" unless you are left alone for 12 mins it simply does not work. Any slight deviation from his BO and you dont have a "spanish fast revolution" for which this is a "strategy" guide for. Suffice to say, Dr. nefarious and I have agreed on the fact that expecting not to see military interaction before 12 mins is unrealistic. We are talking about VIABLE strategies here, not ones that only work if you are given an uncommon set of circumstances.

see if you disagree with my logic here;
play 100 games against the same ranked opponent
see how many of them you actually get to preform the ideal BO
see how many of them you you get to actually revolt in
see how many of them you have to deviate from this strategy entirely in order to have any prayer at winning

[This message has been edited by DONofCHRON (edited 04-17-2007 @ 03:23 PM).]

The chances for it may be small, but there can be an opportunity for this (against Portuguese would be my best bet, I've fast revolted as Germany against those). And I would say the purpose of a guide like this is recognising these circumstances, and knowing how to react on it. If it comes into play only one out of a hundred games, that's still a win more.

I never said anything about the strat, just that it wasn't a contradiction

Dr nefarius the revolting-man cames with another revolting strat.
its a good strat i think.
its taking advantage of Imperial Husars.
in fact, with the imerial research and de 10 Husars it gives you:
1500 wood
1200 food
2300 gold.
so given resources - res. spent on revolting =
500 wood
200 food
1300 gold.
it GIVES you that resources (in form of Imperial Husars)
teh bad thing is this cut your eco.

maybe you can try Chile with Ottomans.
(they get more advantage form Husars, as tehy have RG Husars, and Spanish has Lancers, wich you are not using a lot.)

this is a good and un strat, not too viable, but fun, it is.

Remember, people: "Ideals are like stars: You can never reach them, but you can use them to take your bearings."

with this "strategy" unless you are left alone for 12 mins it simply does not work.

You don't need to be left alone for 12 minutes for this to work - you need to be able to handle your opponent's attacks for about this time. That's a major difference.

In the few games I used this strategy I actually did not have to deviate too much from the build order presented here. People simply did not seem to expect something like that, probably because they all "knew" it was impossible. Of course, if my opponents had had 20/20 hindsight, then things might have been different. The main reason this strategy can work lies in the element of surprise.

maybe you can try Chile with Ottomans. (they get more advantage form Husars, as tehy have RG Husars, and Spanish has Lancers, wich you are not using a lot.)

I would have to check the techtree file, but I do not think Ottomans get the royal guard upgrade. But the two main reasons I chose Spain for this were the faster shipments and, to a lesser extent, the war dogs.

Pretty sure Ottomans have Royal Guard hussars; they're called Gardiners for some reason known only to God.

Pretty sure Ottomans have Royal Guard hussars; they're called Gardiners for some reason known only to God.

I meant I was not sure if they would get the royal guard upgrade through revolting as well, not just through the normal upgrade path.

dr nefarious writes:

You don't need to be left alone for 12 minutes for this to work - you need to be able to handle your opponent's attacks for about this time. That's a major difference.

Yes, I would agree, and certainly not what you intitially said.

In this BO, I see zero reference to constructing any sort of military production building.Proposing an ideal BO or not, Ive read enough of them where I know important buildings are included in them. In fact, what I do specifically see however is;

Build houses as required – you will need a total of 7 before you reach Age 4. Don't build anything else!

So essentially, thinking youre going to fend of a rush on the backs of military shipments alone, its about as unreasonable as saying you wont see any interaction in 12 mins.

Lets then say, you see a relatively early attack and you need to switch gears. What do you have? a bunch of vills on food and gold, maybe a few on wood that you have been using for housing and again, and no military production building. You have no wood because you been building houses and youve already sent your military shipments in a weak attempt to save your villagers from certain death as they are relatively unprotected (especially with no wood, outposts are out of the question) so shipping your 700 wood is not going to get there in time for it to be beneficial, as you will def not have time to gather it, build and then produce units. Needless to say, the way your "strategy" is desgined you have next to no contingency plan.

You can sit here and spout, "ideal this", and "only works this smoothly when" all day long. It does not change the fact that this strategy simply is not viable.

In the few games I used this strategy I actually did not have to deviate too much from the build order presented here.

Shame you dont have recs backing that up.

Of course, if my opponents had had 20/20 hindsight, then things might have been different.

Remember you said this because it essentially summarizes my entire argument. No need for 20/20 hindsight when you have 20/20 foresight. Its called, an explorer, and essentially what you are saying is if your opponent knows how to use him, your strategy is junk. Im sure you could pull this off against corporals and what not, but youd be hard pressed to do so against anyone who isnt fresh off the noob wagon.

It does not change the fact that this strategy simply is not viable.

Well, that would definitely be true in the hands of someone who does not seem to understand it at all - whether out of malice or incompetence, I could not say. Sorry if I expected too much of you, but if your description about fending off a rush is the best you can come up with when you are told to be flexible... Well, too bad. I cannot give you a step-by-step description about how to win a game of AoE3 without thinking for yourself, sorry.

maybe you can try Chile with Ottomans. (they get more advantage form Husars, as tehy have RG Husars

I checked, the Ottomans do not get the Royal Guard update when revolting. They end up with "normal" Imperial Hussars just like the Spanish unless they buy the RG update before the revolution.

Seriously Doc, maybe when you disagree with me you could provide some logic to substantiate your point of view. Now, multiple times, you have told me that I am wrong, but not because anything I am saying is incorrect, just because you say I am wrong...

I gave you one example, as you say you cant outline every situation you need to be flexible in, I cant outline every situation where this strategy gets its skull raped.

For the record, Im really sick of people using the excuse; "youve go to be flexible" to make up for the shortcomings of their strategy. Being able to shift gears and react to what you are seeing is one thing, but if in 100 games, 99 of them you need to deviate from your strategy, it would suffice to say youre better off headed back to the drawing board.

This is getting pointless mainly because since your first post the amount of rhetoric you have used has been at a sharp decline.

If this strategy works, post a rec, as I, along with others have asked for. Also, answer the questions I asked you before, that you seemed to just skip over;

Me writes:

see if you disagree with my logic here;
play 100 games against the same ranked opponent
see how many of them you actually get to preform the ideal BO
see how many of them you you get to actually revolt in
see how many of them you have to deviate from this strategy entirely in order to have any prayer at winning

[This message has been edited by DONofCHRON (edited 04-19-2007 @ 10:40 AM).]

Seriously Don, maybe when you disagree with me you could provide some logic to substantiate your point of view. Now, multiple times, you have told me that I am wrong, but not because anything I am saying is incorrect, just because you say I am wrong...

For the record, Im really sick of people using the excuse; "youve go to be flexible" to make up for the shortcomings of their strategy.

So you would think it was a bad idea to tell someone to take the 405 from Passadena to LAX, because in case of heavy traffic they might need to deviate?

see if you disagree with my logic here

I do, because your test setup is about as flawed as can be, and shows that you don't (want to?) get anything I say. The whole idea of this strategy is to use it in the right circumstances. Don't you build your units based on the task at hand? Then why not choose the strategy the same way? If that is too hard for you...

Btw, you forgot to mention that this strategy fails because I never stated how to handle a minutemen rush!