Hello, there is a funny thing I’m wondering about the game. As you know, on standard maps for most civs you start with 3 villagers and a scout, or an equivalent unit. Your population typically increases quite a lot until either you or your opponent gets defeated, often with massive losses of lives, especially on the losing side. And even then, there are plenty of dangers, like wolves or enemy raidings, long before the finish line.
Let’s forget about kingdoms and empires for a while and focus on the common folk : if you were forced to be part of a random map game, as an actual unit, but had the choice of being either one of the 3 villagers or the scout, which one woud give you the higher chances of surviving until the end of the game ?
Depends on the player in control, and the level of play. On average though, maybe the vils? After a certain point, there should be enough other villagers to give them a chance of survival until the gg is called, whereas scouts have a lower life expectancy.
unless I’m playing against AI the starting scout rarely survives until mid castle age. if he does I set him on auto-scout and he inevitably dies against a castle. so for me it’s clearly the starting vils who have the better chance of survival.
additionally those 3 usually don’t lure a boar and get sent to the safest farms (around the tc) so they should have good survival chances even by villager standards.
I also say the villager. Of course it depends on the map and the game mode as well, but if we’re talking RM 1v1 Arabia it should be the villager over 90% of the time
You would need to control group the 3 of them and play a bunch of games to see about it, because they are definitely going to be all mixed up with the new ones in the first minutes of dark age. While technically they have more of a chance to survive than the scout, it depends on playstyle/level of play. If the player forgets their scout in an empty part of the map or something that’s pretty much jackpot, if the player messes up against an early rush you would be even happier to be that scout. Or you’re in a SP game against the easy AI and the choice doesn’t matter. So yes the villagers are probably the better choice but I don’t think it’s that favoured for them.
i think we should also consider if the life is worth living. i mean, probably a villager has more odds of surviving simply because there are others 120 of them and they can garrison a TC, but you spend literally every second of your life working under the sun with no sick days, no vacation, no health care, no break even because the second you are idle your lord points you to another job you weren’t even qualified for since you were building houses and now you are somehow mining? oh and in late game your lord need pop space for soldiers so you start seeing your homies suddenly dying near you for no reason. i mean, it’s a terrible life
meanwhile the life of the scout is a life of adventure. you go into the darkness into the wilderness without knowing what’s coming, discovering new things, experiencing emotions, meeting new countries, seeing boars and lions and beautiful ponds to rest on the sun of arabia and, if you are lucky enough, your lord sets you to auto-scout which gives you total free-will. that’s the life. short but worth living for
The other day there was a thread about “which unit would you want to be if you had to be stuck in the game” and it was pretty clear everyone’s life suck anyway. Even the “life of exploration” isn’t that compelling if it’s a random map, especially since the unknown either looks like the rest or is trying to kill you (also if autoscout = freewill then with how much they like running into danger they are probs too dumb to appreciate anything). You would need to hope you end up in a good custom scenario or better yet, one of those pretty town scenarios where nothing harmful can possibly happen. Outside of that the “right answer” is pretty much to pray that the player missclicks and delete you before things get hard 11