You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

RoN Strategy for Beginners
Moderated by alincarpetman

Hop to:    
Welcome! You are not logged in. Please Login or Register.6 replies, Sticky
Rise of Nations Heaven » Forums » RoN Strategy for Beginners » City defence - a strategy
Topic Subject:City defence - a strategy
posted 03-01-06 11:22 AM EDT (US)         
Master Silver, you wanted a new thread. Here is one.

This strategy on CITY DEFENCE is based on Empiremaster’s advice. I used it with incredible success, at Classical age at least. There is no reason for it to be less successful at multi-player than at single. But you will debate about this, that is the point.

Over several attacks, at Tougher, different enemy nations, my average ratio of loss is 1 dead on my side while I put 60-70 down.

1. Multiple towers touching your city, covering each other with archers inside, as archers inside the city, ensure you eradicate anybody close by, especially Heavy Infantry, Light and Heavy Cavalry if they dare approach. Three towers eradicate calmly a 20-sized group at their feet. Towers do not cost so much.

2. Empiremaster entrenches archers just in front of the city (I do not care, I need the craft). These archers can reach the first lines of the enemy, decimate whoever is on the front line. The computer is always stupid enough to let his cavalry be decimated in front, but multiple players would put something anyway, like the Heavy Infantry covered by the Light Infantry. Myself, I leave the Heavy Infantry and target the javeliners and the archers, you will see after why I need these ones out in the first place.

3. The Dictator is with my archers in front of the city. He increases Armour and line of sight. Gets some plunder as the killed are within his radius. He makes some decoys to keep busy. That also helps. The enemy aims at him. Perfect, he has many Hit Points, it saves some others and gives me more time.

4. Any archer badly hurt pops back into the city or tower where he heals and replaces a fresh one who goes out. A flanking cavalry charge would eradicate these archers? A laugh: the towers take them down, at worst they jump into the city/towers. Anyway gone is the cavalry.

5. The siege units are still out of range and damaging my towers fast. But my cavalry, unlike the attacking one, already dead, can flank now.

6. Enemy not stupid, he does not waste his cavalry as stated previously, so can use it against mine at least to gain time for the siege units to finish the towers. Here comes my own trick. I have a bunch of javeliners inside the city and the towers. They all go out, with whatever else I have to distract the other folks (some rare Heavy Infantry fight long enough to keep many foes busy). The javeliners all aim at one catapult at a time. They are not so fast destroying a catapult, it is not their favourite sport, but 6-7 do the job well in order to stand enough damage to survive. One javeliner badly hurt, falls back. As they are medium range, the Heavy Infantry would have to move forward to fight them. So they get under the fire of the towers. He chooses, he loses the Infantry or the siege units, but he loses. As I said, I decimated first his javeliners or archers who can counter my javeliners.

7. On top of this, if ever I have a spy around, I bribe one catapult, saving time. He has a scout, I take him out first with the archers.


- Entrenching needs some time and some visibility on the position and tactics of the enemy. I do not even bother. I save the craft for decoys (single player of course, except if I got your scout).

- Writing this, I realize that it may be not so good against the British (long range archers) or the Turks (long range artillery), nations which would not need to come as close as I want. On the other hand, if I have the Brits, it is a piece of cake.

- If you defend with the Koreans, citizens can repair the towers while under fire without splash injury nearly as fast as they are damaged.

- If you are Indian, as the cost of towers does not ramp up (thanks Master Silver for the explanation), the economics of this strategy: many towers, is easily affordable. No elephant yet, wealth is for the towers.

- If the enemy attacks with 4 catapults, then I start to have a problem. Why? Because I would need a rotation of javeliners and the garrisoning capacity of my defence is not infinite. But what? I will lose one tower.

- Ranged Cavalry in large numbers amongst the enemy can destabilize this strategy. They would stay away and come only at the time when my javeliners show off.

posted 03-01-06 12:48 PM EDT (US)     1 / 6       
IMO, the best city defence is good scouting and raiding. Knowing when, where, and how your opponent will strike will allow you to prepare specifically for his army and thus avoid overcompensation. I mean, multiple towers per city is just overkill, especially considering how much they cost. They ought to be behind the city or to the sides anyways.

Your opponent will use the Alt + Right Click formation. LC, previously thought useless for attacking, are quite good for supporting a defensive army since the enemy LI will probably focus-fire on your FA. If you're able to build HA as well then definitely do so. Since you're playing defensively, you probably have a fort, so make use of bribes. You want to bribe the siege units, then the HC, then HI, in that order.

The way that city defenses have always gone for me is that they're either totally in favor of myself or they're totally in favor of my opponent and I should just leave that city as soon as I see the army coming. If it happens to be your capital city, I reccomend taking all your citizens and building a fort behind the city.

If you plan to make a habit of getting your cities attacked, you might as well build the lookout towers.

Here's a much more interesting subject: defending against the two-minute or three-minute rush. This has been well-studied and you can read about it everywhere, but it's the most difficult kind of defense there is.

Red Revolution
(id: master silver)
posted 03-01-06 04:32 PM EDT (US)     2 / 6       
I think this sounds like a very solid plan tryhard. A few minor correction you might want to make. The indians towers ramps up at half cost. This means that if you build one for 50 metal and 30 gold, then the next would normally cost 75 metal and 50 gold, would now cost around 50 metal and 40 gold (I am not sure if those are the exact tower costs).
Instead of using all javaliners, I might try putting a light cavalry or two in place to go along. The light cavalry take out segie fastest of all units and can quickly retreat when needed.
While playing with the infidle clan (wars clan) I learned some very important ways to buy time. While this heavily defended city is being attacked, you might want to build one tower behind the city with a couple citizens. If the city is lost this buys you about 20-30 precious seconds to bring in reinforcements.
4 catapualts a problem? Use the light cavalry on sucidie runs. They are cheap, fast, and the best unit to take out segie. Also try bribing the unit next to the catapult to cause more panic and confusion among the army.
British archers? Once again my anwser is use Light cavalry! These excel at taking out archers, segie, light infantry, and supply wagons.
However, light cavalry is not for everyone. If you encounter heavy cavalry, and heavy infantry, they will not be of much help. Consult your doctor and the enemy army before using light cavalry. Some side effects may include loss of food, wood, and dizzyness.
Other than considering using light cavalry to help, good job tryhard this a nice defensive tatic. *claps for the new thread*

posted 03-02-06 10:08 AM EDT (US)     3 / 6       
Hi ssfsx17 (a pseudo! I had to scroll twice not to mispell it here),
I read with interest your comments, especially the Right-Click formation I do not know, but I do not know everything at RON, what proves that the games is worth something.

I think I will paste your comments on my computer, study and maybe comment or ask (maybe means if I have something to say, not talking for talking).

As for the point of "do not let your cities get attacked in the first place". Well, happy you. I assume that, if you face e.g. Master Silver, you will have to revise this assumption.

But look below about this strategy (which I precise again is borrowed and adapted from a much more veteran player than me).

Thanks, Master Silver for the comments. I paste here some tests of the strategy:

"Damm, the way this strategy can work, even better at Medieval Age than at Classical. Better because I have access to longer range for the towers and higher garrisoning capacity for both the city and the towers.
At Gunpowder, it works also well, but it is much more tight because of the speed at which the canons can erase buildings.

For a test against a developped enemy, I took old saves from a World campaign at Tougher, I invaded the Russian capital (territory strength 4) then the Iroquois capital (strength 5), to confront difficult enemies with my Germans. Two really different games.
BTW the German Heavy Infantry is real boring, far two slow.

* Russians: 7 dead in the game against 239 (mostly Light or Ranged cavalry flanking, I did not use spies).

Entrenching the archers surrounding the Despot, in front of the city, the idea from Empiremaster, does not work well. I was surprised by the first massive Russian attack but had time to entrench. I had no general at this time (no fort yet) so could not create decoys. Decoys help more as the large cavalry force attacking would have killed my archers too fast. I pushed my archers back into the city/towers for the cavalry to lessen.

Then, I make one javeliner jump out from a tower or the city, alternatively. The Russian got mad. The javeliner confuses and hits the cavalry, when he has some free space he crawls a bit towards the infantry frontline, insults some foes (Gladiator) until some move towards him. Then he runs. When a javeliner is hurt, I replace him with whatever fresh I have.
The advantage of having Decoys is that the decoys can do this job without my men suffering damage.

When he is really confused and too busy, has suffered losses, I flank.

* Iroquois: 21 dead against 244 (some of this hopeless Heavy Infantry, cavalry, but mostly bribed canons and some spies, I lost 7 of my own combat units). I used spies extensively when he had canons and abandoned the bribed to their fate, it confused him. I just kept one of each of his unique units for my collection.

With the Iroquois and all their excellent abilities, for the strategy I had some trouble and had to adapt.

The Iroquois attacked me with massive troops including lots of excellent archers. I tried to flank with cavalry but I saw so much damage so fast that I made them withdraw like scared rabbits. It is when I decided to shift for spies. Also, the archers did not come close enough to the city to be decimated and they fire very fast. I could finish everything else (Cavalry, Heavy Infantry, Artillery), but eventually I had to charge the archers with all what I had to finish them (Cavalry and all the troops from the city).

There is another advantage to the strategy. Irishfast would try to plant informers, but I cannot let his spies spoil my strategy, so I have scouts everywhere (I never used as many scouts as these two days), so he cannot know that, altogether, I can launch 25 men or more from my city when he is weakened.

When he comes with a scout, my fastest and less costly technique is to get rid of him using a group of Ranged Cavalry with a general (thanks Irishfast for the tip). Against the Iroquois, I used 5 dragons and still had to lose one to his archers, but I made it. Then my spies go shopping.

Another advantage of this strategy is that it takes him time to cause serious damage to the pool city/towers. So, when he attacks a city I did not expect, the towers with their crossbowman inside, keep him busy enough for my reinforcements to reach. The cavalry distracts his attention while the infantry jumps into the towers or the city, and the strategy starts, even with the towers already damaged (I can lose one tower).

With three towers, this strategy is a Terminator. Two is OK, but I have to be more careful when I face a large army with 3-4 siege units.

So now, I plan any new city more in advance, gather the necessary resources, move lots of my citizens at once to the chosen place and start at once the city and the towers. I also come with a small army to protect the citizens in case he jumps on my back. This army is just composed of those who will fill in for the strategy. The main army, the two flanking groups (Ranged Cavalry, Light Cavalry) are hidden somewhere protected and strategic. Indeed, it happened quite often that he attacks me when I have just started the building, but cannot forbid that I finish one building or the other, where I then hide the wounded. I could sacrifice some citizens, as long as I manage to build everything, but he not even finish one of them".

posted 03-02-06 07:12 PM EDT (US)     4 / 6       
To truly study defense, you must first study the most likely attacks you will face. If you know which nation your opponent is and you can sufficiently scout his army, you can know how to defend using as little as possible. You may not even need to build any extra towers or forts if you are properly prepared.

I will speak from my experience of what has caused my attacks to fail:

Ancient rush: I come in with 3 HI and 1 LI, with 2 more HI walking to the scene. The only time this has ever failed is when the enemy has build a barracks before I come with a FA. If the enemy builds it after I have arrived, the rush succeeds. If the enemy starts building a tower when I come, I am able to at least sack the capital for +500 and pull ahead for the rest of the game. Therefore, the best way to stop an Ancient rush is to see that your enemy is a rushing-type nation, see the army he is building with a scout, and built a barracks and FA. This is basic, basic stuff that has been well-studied.

Fast Classical Attack: The main thing that has stopped my fast classical despot attacks from working is the presence of a fort. Not just a single tower, which I can ignore, but a whole fort. Since I am doing this entirely with the Despot, HC, HI, and some LI, I have nothing for taking down forts with any reasonable amount of safety. Building a fort in Classical can be very surprising because forts are very expensive. This requires a lot of scouting, because if you build a fort and the enemy does not do a Fast Classical Attack, you just wasted a lot of resources.

Beyond this point, my attacks have never been stopped except by a superior army coming in from the side or from behind. Even if I am attacked first, I can use my offensive army to drive him back and then push for a counterattack. In fact, this is precisely how I stop attacks against myself in the later ages: by secretly having my own army, allowing the city to be temporarily taken, and killing the enemy from behind. This way, I can take out the siege, supply, and Patriot first and deal with the rest of the forces later. This game is all about movement, progress, and fluidity.

Even if I were playing as the Chinese, Russians, Koreans, or Mayans, I would still avoid building too many structures. As the Chinese, I would rely heavily on having superior quantities of food and being able to summon an instant militia army, mixed with the unique LI who counter many other units. As the Russians, I would build LC and HA to kill off his supply and forget about the rest. As the Mayans or Koreans, one tower per city would be sufficient to supplement the army that I ought to be building. As the Indians, I would use towers and forts to push borders rather than for defense, because I ought to make a big attack of my own anyways.

Tryhard, I reccomend you examine some of the strategies posted on other websites, because all of these subjects are well-studied. I am not an expert; in fact, I am not even an intermediate-level player. I am only good enough to beat the computer on Toughest (which is surprisingly easy) and defeat all of my friends at home. However, the reason why I can beat the computer and my friends is because of strategies which I have studied from elsewhere and from watching recorded games by professionals. Here are some links for you:


Infidels Clan:

Mr. Fixit Online:

Tactical Warfare Collective:

posted 03-03-06 08:26 AM EDT (US)     5 / 6       
Thanks ssfsx17,

you do not seem "not even an intermediate player". To my experience, 90% of the players do not cope well with a Normal level of difficulty. Players at Tougher are already scarce.

I have a special aim in this forum, as someone who helped to rejuvenate its sister Pharaoh HG when everything was said "over studied". Indeed, most valuable info was discovered 2 years and after the launch of the site. I do not pretend I will do anything similar here, for the very reason that I do not know if there is anything more to know, but already veteran players do not know the answer to some of my questions I consider critical (thread Discoveries on my own).

I appreciate better your valuable comments than redundant links, though I go through them. So no to bother the forumers I try to be pertinent, if not overinformed.
Would you waste such a time anawering to me about, as you state, what is overknown, if you did not have a pleaure in that?

I will paste your text and study it. I rely on cybercafes for connections and do not answer like that, my posts are kind of 1 day delayed, like a call to the moon (or Central Africa more accurately).

This is what I wrote at home:

Master Silver and ssfsx17,

In your answers I found interesting points.

An add-on: this strategy is good when building up a strong nation but especially when supporting a border push. You can pearce right in the middle of the foe territory with one of these pools city/towers you build in seconds (you affect maybe 20 citizens at a go), he MUST take it out his map fast, or he is dead (you get his caravans, for a starter). No assimilation time, no repatriation or healing required. But take care of a good mapping, either you use this city as a rear base for a final assault to reduce the attrition and repatriate the wounded; or you must have enough space, as he would hit you from all sides with siege units from within his territory. This city is wasted for business, it exists only for warfare.
This is History. Why do you think the central part of France shows a castle every two kilometres, near every village: two centuries of war, English holding South, French holding North (Medieval). None could move more than some kilometres in a year. This also explains the Yugoslav segregation mapping of the Slovens/Croats/Bosniacs/Serbs (Gunpowder).

- The notion of “overcompensation”, in other words why 3 towers and not 25. When Empiremaster submitted this strategy I simply adapted, I thought of this. I was wondering the umpteenth tower may end up costing badly, especially if I am ready to lose some. “The towers are expensive”. No. Except on specific maps with rare possible mines. Less than the soldiers you lose under my walls and the ones I do not lose in combat.

In the first place, I realized reading you all pals, that you are much more ready to lose things than I am anyhow. I consider a disgrace at Tougher to lose more than 1 for 50 I kill over a whole game (it is the actual ratio for the French Foreign Legion). One exception: against the British, their archers aim too far, there I am more bullish (against a good British everydody here seems to neglect, I may lose up to 1 for 5). Quoting Irishfast: “ don’t be afraid to lose”. I do not. I mean, I do not lose.

- “Use your Light Cavalry on suicide runs”. Suicide is indeed the word, the basis that generated this strategy. Light Cavalry may reveal a liability to rely upon. They die too fast under enemy fire (look at what I just wrote about me facing Iroquois archers), except the delighting Cossacks who ride so fast that the range shooters miss them most of the time (the Spanish hit cavalry better, but who dared write the Russians are bad?). I needed a maybe more heavy/boring strategy, but less of a gamble.
I will not use 1-2 Light Cavalry from my city, of course I tried, for one reason: their way to the catapult is blocked by pedestrians. Most of these horsemen would have to go left and right, they will not reach fast enough coming from the front (this is why people flank). Five LC would do it, but do not forget my defence is already packed. Heavy Cavalry would go straight? As you state, does not work, and the resources are first for the towers (and no HC at Classical). Javeliners are the “everything well, nothing great” compromise.

- “Bribe the unit next to the siege unit rather than the siege”. Indeed, it is much better, but sometimes I am too short on time at Gunpowder, when canons destroy buildings too fast, I need these seconds I save; when the computer has started bombing the city, he will not redeploy his siege unit for a treator. A nuance, nonetheless: the spy has to stick to the siege unit in order to bribe, this also takes time. Conclusion: I have time: unit next, I do not not: siege.
I often bribe a cluster. Then I rush out of the city while I flank, or at least look like, in order to save some of the bribed (against the Turks: I want their siege units).

- “Raid, raid, raid”. Raid these cities, boy. I am raided, indeed, I do not even bother, I park my citizens at risk and work on other cities (I promise you, I do not care). The city building is always set to cover the miners or the woodcutters against raiders (if it protects the woodcutters, the next protects the miners, one reason why I like Nomad). Two cities heavily raided at a go, I am still operational.

- “Getting a habit of having your cities attacked”. Man, I love it. RoN would not have population limits, it would be damning, but there when I am attacked with a big load, I know that this load is not somewhere else. Most times, the foe would have one active army and one starting to exist (except the Bantu, a great nation for this). Foe just lost a big army under my walls? Time for a good push through his borders.

If an enemy attacks my city, the field favours me with this strategy, for free I get lots of plunder, I can make shopping bribing AND save many of the spies/bribed (BTW it makes me think, at multiplayer I would have 3 scouts in an attacking group, not one), I can give him the impression that he can still save his attack and his army insisting and reinforcing: a waste, since I unleash my flanking attack, the hidden forces in my strategic city, and always a surprise I have for him.

To compensate for this strategic defense I submit, the attacker has to be ready to lose a lot ANYHOW. And do not forget that the computer does not care about wasting resources. You do.

- Sir, who would rather give out one city rather than defending it, you have to take my cities. Eventually. Because I am on my way to take all yours (you guys are always hyper-nervous, me I have a plan). You have a tower behind the city to get time for reinforcements to come in case the city is taken; did you add a scout to your reinforcement? I like your men.

There is something excellent in this idea to get a tower behind to hide some citizens and gain time, but some points:
1.maybe a bit costly considering my strategy, I have already paid for my city’s frontal/besides towers. I insist Towers cost little, but this little I have to have it.
2.This strategy is made for not losing a city. If the enemy pays the price and gets the city, he is good, with a damm army that probably can hold it (in the first place he killed or seriously wounded many of my men to achieve that).
3.Accordingly, I do not attack with 3-4 siege units, 6 is a very minimum. Your tower behind will last 9 seconds, the fort 20 (I checked that). Not enough, sorry. Indeed, it is the most probable cause of failure in this strategic defence: the foe comes with lots of siege units (the very first thing I assess: how many amongst his siege units are decoys, so that I have an exact timetable).
4.I do not take a city, I take the compound. Fort an issue, I may start with the fort. The fort is behind, I protect my infantry, I finish the fort first. What is the point in seizing a city under fire that your sappers cannot repair (exception: the Koreans; these would have better military units, they would be Nation Number One).

I put the forts, now, touching the cities. But besides, not behind. They help fight, save time and can garrison (and what they garrison, that the foe does not know).

- “the best city defence is Good scouting”. I do scouting in defense, but with spies, not scouts. Because you often do not see his scout (he walks behind, stays hidden or whatever). But when your spy starts getting yellow, damm he has a scout. I had nasty surprises being sure he had no scout, now I prefer it that way. If he has no scout, I know he is there, but he does not know I know. And spies are cheap for their benefits (and do not talk about it if I am Russian).

Indeed the best city “attack” is scouting. Where is my cavalry? (of course I must have one somewhere; no, always two, but that you did not think of checking). You want to plant my towers, I have scouts everywhere. You have to assume that I may have the resources according to my strategy inside the city. In this case, you lose a lot, this damm strategic defence works. They are not there, in this case you lose, because this city is a trap, I am now targetting something much more valuable to me. I always set one city as a “fool’s trap”. Against the computer, it is easy, you would say. No, the computer may be stubbornly sticking to a strategy, like he wants to get the wonder or the capital anyhow, and at Tougher does nor care for resources (his work on timber or whatever is fancy display). For a human it is easier: I did not play yet RoN on multiplayer, but I started multiplayer as early as 1993 with nulmodem cables (no internet at this time), I know who the players are. I play the computer as if it were a human, and if it is too stupid on a game, I abort it.
Being even more precise, quoting Irishfast: “raid, attack the Capital city, or a city with a wonder”. My capital is always the easiest city to defend or retake, if the foe takes it, he will not hold it (spider web). A wonder? Do I play so bad that I cannot survive without the wonder (i.e. I give up every time the foe got the wonder before me?). Human players are often intestines over brains.

There I stop. I can carry on because more was interesting in your posts. Next post may be as long. But enough for now.

posted 03-04-06 07:45 AM EDT (US)     6 / 6       

You give me precised and detailed examples that help me to learn.

Please do not feel upset by the way I may answer sometimes, I play it as if I take it personally. That helps. But I do not: in the first place I assume you are right. Learning strategy: e.g. defending a lost cause, once and for all, until it is wiped out, so that I do not remain with half a ghoul inside my mind about it.

There is one great thing in this game, at least under modern ages, it is that it mimics well real History.

Ancient Rush: when you were routed, your foe was better prepared, and that is your point. And better preparation means that he has to assume he can be the most unlucky, for example the scout having missed what he had to see (or was lured into seing something else). Seize my capital with a rush at Ancient Age and get 500 everything? No. You do not take my capital early at Ancient Age. You come with 5 HI, 1 LI (quote). That is real expensive stuff. Of course, I have an archer, and a javeliner, the early best to defend my main city, especially preparing this strategy. But, you hit me there, I would not have expected you to come hoping seize my capital with 3 HI and 1 LI.

My second city is a weakness I work a lot on. In your post, you base on a lot on the fact that your scouting is successful. Indeed, you manage to scout me well and there you have an opportunity to hit me definitely because my army at this time is never well balanced. The computer still sometimes catches me right on spot. Lots of sweat.

Classical: your whole paragraphs are to me excellent.
- I realized, the other way round, that an early fort in my backyard is a waste of resources, because the foe bets on less as you say, so I can handle him with a mixture of other resources.
- “Secretely having my own army”. You see. Better relying first on a good plan than a scout who missed it. I have a hidden bunch of mixed cavalry, mostly Ranged, that can clear the field around the battlefield, so that in a hurry he cannot retreat, cannot reinforce, cannot regroup (the Russians, Arabs, Roumanians did that especially well). I am investigating the potentials of Ranged Cavalry I think I underestimated until now. They help a lot for this purpose.
- “Light Infantry can counter many other units”. You mention the Chinese, but I think indeed it is the best asset of all LI.

“I would not build too many structures”. Yes, why not 25 towers. This strategy is not much about structures, what hit me in Empiremaster’s strategy is the bunch of long range archers with the Despot standing in front of the city (if luckily the Despot is around, but I can wait). This is the key. The towers are there to defend them at close range, not to defend the city. I still need flanking cavalry otherwise I will not make it as his siege units will finish me.
The point is that I deprive you then of your “movement, progress and fluidity”. You need a lot (“superior army”) and will lose a lot anyhow, and I should be able to repatriate most of the wounded in case I am overwhelmed.
On the other hand, if I do not have a secret army somewhere, like you, even a small one, this strategy is a dead end, because as static warfare I would take no lasting benefit in getting rid of your troops. This successful defense, gobbling up most of the enemy men for a while, must be followed immediately by a rush, a push into his borders.

There is a huge drawback in visiting experts sites before you have met your own succession of trials and errors. You copycat a routine afresh, but you do not really handle the why you do that, because you did not brainchild it.
Many people use my strategies at Pharaoh (I built the biggest civilizations, sometimes twice bigger that was assumed the maximum reachable limit) but most say they cannot make it. I had to work a lot on my own too, to achieve that (as if it would take me one week full time to play the first 10 minutes of a RoN solo).

It is the reason why, for now, I would rather rely on you, pals, so that you help me on the right track. One mentions an unusual troop formation against my strategy (maybe you?). I am not even yet comfortable with all formations.

I spent maybe four hours writing this post. Sometimes, I reply specifically to a point, wait, read myself and say: “no, damm, he is right, I pretend this works but, indeed it worked once, by chance”. I cannot fool you, you know the game too. My point in foruming is not to fool myself in the first place. Of, course, you will never see these comments I realized were inept, but to me they persist. So, thanks for the help.

I know I can hit most at multiplayer, and learn a lot, because I did, but for other games. With RoN, from Uganda, narrow band, costly internet, power cuts, forget it.

You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

Hop to:    

Rise of Nations Heaven | HeavenGames