Early or late era campaign?

[Pfundner]

hey, im about to download SS, just wondering if early or late is best. i dont like having to wait for ages to build better units but i dunno if i want to jump straight in at the late era. In the early campaign is there an actual era system (you cant build so and so units until turn so and so etc) or is it like in vanilla, once youve built the building you can build the units?

cheers

[Musthavename]

Without any submods, you can build any units when you have the relevant building (with the obvious exception of gunpowder), but ofcourse all cities are pretty low level and a lot start out with practically nothing. However, if you want a unit system, when you put patch 6.1 on, select RR (real recruitment). This categorises units and makes them available at various dates.

I personally like building everything from scratch and as such much prefer the Early Era. Late Era starts off pretty decently developed, so if you just want to get high tier units quick, go for that one. Civ's generally start off with access to their mid-tier stuff at least, so you shouldn't have to fight with militias / levies.

[Barser]

I always play early though lately I am beginning to wonder if late is more fun since they dont have to wait 100 turns to get fortress :hmmm:.

[frederickm]

I always play early though lately I am beginning to wonder if late is more fun since they dont have to wait 100 turns to get fortress :hmmm:.

Thats ridiculous, I played Turks on early and by turn 100s I had covnerted all my castles into large cities.

[MoToM]

Late is great. Still plenty of room for development, around 30 years until gunpowder appears and many higher tier buildings still left to construct, it just allows you to field a more rounded army from the start. If you include RR in your install the era system is very much still at work.

[Point Blank]

Late has a better unit variety faster, and more technology changes sooner. Late all the way.

[The Cobra]

Early if you want an epic campaign, Late if you wan't to fight non stop.

[marceror]

I'm currently playing a late French campaign, and I haven't regretted going late once. In contrast, my previous early era Byzantine campaign seemed more slow paced, and getting to higher tiered settlement levels was very slow, and even difficult without a lot of high chivarly generals.

I think late era will be my standard from now on.

[The Cobra]

I'll always go with the early campaign, nothing beats a classic.

[The Noble Lord]

Early first, because its longer. Then Late campaign. They are both great.

[Bacon!]

I nearly always play early as i like to carve my own empire (even if it can be slow and tedious) rather then starting with one.

[Madden]

Yup, Late era...and just add to the end date for extra years.

[King Sama]

I play early, but i think that im going to try out late. I like using late era units and i never get to them. Plus, you dont have to fight through all the rebels, there is actually some action from the start. Historically i doubt that that most of the places were so underdeveloped and undergarrisoned.

And also something interesting; since the late era campaign has 1 year per turn as opposed to 1.5, late era is actually longer, with 340(late) turns as opposed to 320(early)


Edit: I just realized, that was my 50th post!


Well off to the polls

[SirKoskelot]

The best thing about late period is the fact that you can build those trebutchets from the start. Thy make the catholic-campaigns much more faster and intresting from the start, as you can assault settlement or two before the pope gets a chance to interfere.

Obviously I got tired of assaulting castles with rams and ladders.

[Ataraxie]

Grab the SS edition of the CBUR mod - then play as the Byzantine Empire/Genoa/Turks/Hungary in the late period.

Suddenly it's a very different game for those factions

Otherwise, I usually play late, as I prefer to get stuck into a proper war, with 'front lines', rather than roam around fighting rebels, the campaign has marginally longer turn length I read somewhere, and the AI generally dishes it out better I find in the late period - better tech = better troops = harder game.

[spanish_emperor]

late all the way

[Stephan de St. Omer]

I play the late era campaign becaise I can play the Teutonic Order in that one. I also liked to play the Templars in early but somehow the TO is more fun. The Templars are too weak in my opinion especially the Templar Knight, which are suposed to be the best cavalry in their time.

[MIK TG]

Late, because it is more excinting, wars breake up much faster, capturing new settlements is harder and you dont get stuck with spear militia for 50 turns.

[The Cobra]

They don't have any swordsmen (the templars) afaik.

[Tetsu]

I personally prefer Early, I kinda enjoy the immediate rush to fill borders with rebel settlements before the AI does, then the tense waiting game that follows. Then someone starts a war and the entire thing collapases. Fun times