On the Utility and Use of Marines

[The Pioneer]

Sure, Marines are underrated in Civ community but I agree that they are very useful when properly used. I always liked them and used them. I usually play a two continent game on a huge map. In most of my games I had to make an amphibious assault. I load a couple transports (I moded them down to a capacity of 6) and another one filled up with defensive units in order to establish a firm foot once I've taken the city) and depending on the situation air and naval cover and/or a landing with mixed units at another location in order to divert the counterattack that will follow the capture of the city. Heck, I used those boys back in Civ II.

I have also had a situation when my Marines were decimated and the assault had to take place at another location at a later time but if everything always went according to plan it would all be boring , right . The Marines is a great unit which, if used/played correctly can help and will make the game a bit more interesting, due to the combined arms attack. Sure you can win a game without the Marines but then you wont get to hear that Machine gun as it rains hell onto the enemy .

As a last note I don't think you can draw parallels to the real Marines. This is just a game!

[dunk]

Here's a question...

If I load an army with marines, can I make an amphibious assault?

[jshelr]

Just a quick point about the "dead end tech" argument. That point is valid for not researching it yourself. But you can buy it or trade for it at a very low price.

This approach using marines looks very interesting and thanks very much. I've always landed massive stacks of infantry and artillery to defend tanks on a mountain or something and have never had losses to speak of. Eight or nine transports full will always discourage the AI from attacking. But if the situation called for an attack with fewer resources, perhaps because more defense was needed at home, the direct marine gambit attack on the city might be the only way to do it and live to tell the tale. (Consider using this when behind in an SS race and the opponent's capital is on the ocean!)

The AI doesn't use marines often in my experience. I remember once when one marine tried to lead a transport onto a defended beach. He didn't make it. I've usually lined the coast with units when playing as a small country trying to steal an SS victory from much larger AI rivals. This prevented any landing other than marines and, while they have approached the coast with transports, they have gone away. If any AI civ lands in my territory when I'm at full strength, artillery will soften them up and tanks will take them out regardless of mountain locations.

[Gen.Dragolen]

Originally posted by Theseus
General:

* Shores have a 50% bonus? Where is this in the editor?

* BEF = British Expeditionary Force?

* Although I like your mods, I'm still playing "stock." Can't be done with the editor, but I'd love to see Marines bonused for their primary mission... taking ground. It's a misconception that it's about beaches... First to Fight, period.

Theseus,

Thanks. Been pulling out some old boxed wargames for inspiration.

In response to your questions, first, if memory serves me still, it should be under Terrain as Shore... I'll have a look when I get home tonight.

Second, Yes. The Germans thought they faced machinegun companies when the first met the BEF infantry in Belgium in WWI.

Third, Yes, the Marines are like the ones in Jerry Pournelle's Falkenberg stories (from the sign over the door to the Orderly Room
"You are Marines in order to die and we will send you where you can die"
Only in CivIII they just die instead of completing their mission.

Calling them Marines is part of the problem. Too specific a mental image. They should be called and used as shock troops that hit hard as possible, and can then dig in to allow more mobile reinforcements to exploit their handywork. They should be like the swordsmen in ancient times: just shock troops.

Only problem is that in CivIII, you don't have a very realistic representation of what outfits like the Marines can actually do... That's one of the reasons I upped their relative strengths in the mod I posted. The current US Marines would need to have Paratrooper abilities too to reflect just how mobile they are. C-17's can put troops on the ground on any level 2 miles of road. The way I have them set in the mod, it almost makes them useful as a mobile reaction force sitting in transports off the coast of some annoying CC.

This leads me to miss the sheer number of unit types I had available in the CTP2 mods I used to play... air mobile cavalry was nice.

The funny thing is I have seen the AI use Marines as regular infantry because there was no strategic resources needed to make them, and there was for Infantry... And yes they died by the dozen in the face of my Marines, Artillery and MA.


D.

[Arrian]

I have never built a Marine unit. Ever.

I have not invaded another continent in the modern age since a couple of patches ago. My games no longer reach the Modern Age. Any invasions will typically be with Musketmen/Samurai or Samurai/Cavalry/Infantry. In those instances, I have had little difficulty with the standard "drop some guys off on a mountain" approach.

I can see instances where they could be useful. But I'd rather build some more battleships and regular troops (inf/tanks) and use a settler to build a city of my own to shelter my invasion force, as so:

Drop off massive invasion stack (+1 settler) on a hill near the enemy core. Use Battleships to blast the RR/road connections. Hopefully they will be able to destroy all those roads. Perhaps a turn or two of preliminary bombardment might be necessary. Then build a city, and rush: barracks, walls, harbor, temple. Now I have my own -basically unflippable- base camp.

-Arrian

[King of Rasslin]

I agree. The modern era is so screwed up, it isn't even that fun to play. Imagine being #3 and knowing that you are going to lose regardless of what you do. Or being #1 and not caring what happens because you will win anyway.

The modern armor should have lower armor. The marine should be able to kill a modern armor. I mean, he only has 1 movement, so he should be the swordsman of the modern age. Modern armor should be like the horsemen. I think marines should, in fact, be stronger than modern armor.

Hell, even infantry get 2 movement by the end! Tanks get 3. The marine is so weak and slow, with only 1 movement. The paratrooper needs a slight boost in power but a huge increase in operational range. Like in Civ 2. I guess the airfield will help things in PtW.

However, didn't you HATE it when the AI built a city next to your airfield in Civ 2 and just took it! Man...

[dawidge]

Three men in a jeep is armor's second worst enemy. Anti-tank rockets are a hell of a lot cheaper than tanks.

To make the #1 enemy of armor, put that antitank rocket on the skids of the cheapest helicopter you can buy.

The Civ3 modern era favors armor too much. Just look at what the Polish cavalry was able to do to the panzers just by riding around and dropping grenades on the engine compartments. Sure, they got wiped out in the process, but Germany had to pour far more resources into Poland than they'd expected to.

The strength of tanks is the attack. Their best application as a defensive platform is as a counterstrike companion to the infantry defense.

[ShredZ]

All terrain like grassland, desert, plains, coast... its all a 10% defensive bonus.

The fact that most ppl only use the core 3 units - Id like to see marines and paras much more useful. Maybe PtW will be the answer...

[King of Rasslin]

Modern armor have 16 defence while mech infantry have 18. Modern armor don't need that much defence...

[player1]

I put them at 14 defense in my MOD.

[zanthus]

I am playing a game now as Egypt on island map, warm. There is only one tundra on the entire map, so there is only ONE oil on ENTIRE map! I can see the entire map, so I checked in everyone elses empire, even under cities, and the only oil that there is lies under an English coastal city. Fearing that Lizzy had tanks, I figured a traditional land and then invade wouldn't work, so I loaded up 3 galleons with Marines and 1 with Infantry (the largest force I could get to England quickly enough) and took that city. Fortunately for me, the Brits didn't build tanks, so the infantry "counter-attack" was turned away by my surviving marines. I am now the only empire in the world with oil and am proceding to destroy the Brits and the Persians with my new Tanks and Bombers, with Fighters protecting my cities from England's remaining Bombers

[King of Rasslin]

Nice, Zanthus. I would make marines if resources were tighter. Maybe multiplayer games will have an oil hog and people that lack the black gold. I can see 3 civs with marines fighting 1 with tanks right now

The marine actually has a use when you don't have oil. And oil should be harder to get, in my opinion. It should be DEEP within a desert 5 or 6 tiles long. There should be 6 oils for every 8 civs, and 2 or 3 of the oils should be on islands or very isolated places. That would make the game more interesting.

[notyoueither]

The biggest effect of Marines in MP...

You have how many important coastal cities? 8 did you say?

OK. The 'possibility' that there are 8 Marines in a Transport floating around out there will tie down how many units?

[Harovan]

Originally posted by notyoueither
The biggest effect of Marines in MP...

You have how many important coastal cities? 8 did you say?

OK. The 'possibility' that there are 8 Marines in a Transport floating around out there will tie down how many units?

depending on the map, 4-8 scouting destroyers. And a small militia of 8 infantries to protect the cities on the RR network.

[Zachriel]

Originally posted by Catt
Empirical marine success rate: 25.35%

Excellent post, Catt. Very excellent. Your use of the scientific method to make confirmations of the defense bonuses is especially commendable. In the right hands, the marines are a very useful tool in the Civ3 toolkit.

The 25% figure you quote is correct, but these stats may be more directly pertinent. Attacking with a veteran Marine at 8 against an infantry defending at 10, fortified in a metropolis, and the defender has the specified hp:

4hp - 7%
3hp - 18%
2hp - 38%
1hp - 69%

The lesson? Use massive bombardment to prepare the strike zone. If you send Marines in without shore bombardment, you are sending good soldiers to die needlessly. You should also have infantry support along to defend the captured city, and perhaps armor ready to extend the attack inland.

[Catt]

Originally posted by King of Rasslin
I can see 3 civs with marines fighting 1 with tanks right now [ . . . ] The marine actually has a use when you don't have oil.

Originally posted by notyoueither
The biggest effect of Marines in MP...

You have how many important coastal cities? 8 did you say?

OK. The 'possibility' that there are 8 Marines in a Transport floating around out there will tie down how many units?

Aye, there's the rub. (Zachriel will correct my misquote ). I won't get much of a chance to play MP, but the MP player who understands marines will shock those who have never used nor defended against a marine. How many of us keep at least 3 infantry fortified in every coastal city, and at least 5 after our challenger has marines and a navy? At least 3 mechanized infantry? Anyone? And a solid naval picket to see the invasion coming?

NYE (among others) will spend some time in the "classroom," "tutoring" others on the value of marines.

Originally posted by Zachriel
The lesson? Use massive bombardment to prepare the strike zone. If you send Marines in without shore bombardment, you are sending good soldiers to die needlessly.

Zachriel states, with absolute clarity, the preferred invasion method. Attacking without a definite "softening up" from appropriate naval bombardment results in needless losses -- you've doomed worthy marines. Soften your target before taking it -- but take it, and take it with speed - seizing two or three cities at once (without forewarning - other than a declaration of war before entring enemy territory) can significantly alter the balance of power -- which is (in Civ 3) the duty of marines.

Catt

[King of Rasslin]

Bombardment is pitifully weak. And in multiplayer, you have to worry about the other guys navy. He will see you coming for a few turns, and will have time to ready the defence of his cities. And what about him bombarding your transports? He will then send in his navy and crush you. The key to success is speed here.

However, you can see an invasion a mile away if you just have a single submarine that finds the transports moving. It is just too easy to stop marines. Making 2 loaded carriers to bombard is just too expensive.

[Theseus]

I think in MP we'll see massive invasion forces that dwarf any contemplated here.

Surprise attack:
20 Battleships
4-6 Destroyers looking for Subs
6-8 Carriers, each with 1 JF and 3 Bombers
Redundancy:
16 Marines for a direct attack
16 Infantry and 32 Tanks for a Hill landing

And vice versa: Homeland defense will be a much more critical issue...

Back OT: I still haven't used Marines in a meaningful way.

But I will. Semper Fi.

[Catt]

Originally posted by King of Rasslin
Bombardment is pitifully weak. And in multiplayer, you have to worry about the other guys navy. He will see you coming for a few turns, and will have time to ready the defence of his cities. And what about him bombarding your transports? He will then send in his navy and crush you. The key to success is speed here.

However, you can see an invasion a mile away if you just have a single submarine that finds the transports moving. It is just too easy to stop marines. Making 2 loaded carriers to bombard is just too expensive.

Don't all your points apply to intercontinental invasions in general? How, in addressing your points above, is an invasion force with a marine component to it at any disadvantage to an invasion force without a marine component?
Catt

[King of Rasslin]

Marines take up space where tanks should be. And they cost maintenance. I would rather have tanks, for obvious reasons.

[Gen.Dragolen]

King, but what do you do when the CC only has one decent place for you to land troops, and they happen to be in the way: tanks can't attack off the ship, regardless of the DD models you saw on D-Day, 06 June 1944.

Like Vel keeps pointing out: situation drives your tactics. If the AI had a coastal city on an important resource I didn't want him/her to have, in go the marines. Hopefullly with a heavy bombardment by battleships to smooth the beach defenses out a bit...


D.

[Barfus]

good suggestions everyone.....so how does anyone who uses marines go about using them when the enemy has mech inf and tanks, or god forbid, modern armor......on their side. in my current situation, ive waited till late in the game to do any serious invasions, and now eveyone has militaries about a third of mine, and id have to leave some troops at home to defend against neighbors...

[Theseus]

From the CFC chat on 10/4:

[18:49] Will armies of marines/berserks get
amphibious ability in PTW?
[18:50] <+Mike_Breitkreutz_FIRAXIS> Dave: Yes if the army
consists solely of Marines or Berserks.
[18:50] sweet
[18:50] <+Mike_Breitkreutz_FIRAXIS> Armies now take on the abilities of the units they are made up of but only if it is
made up of only 1 type of unit
____________

Cool... could be unbelievably awesome for Paras!!

[Jaybe]

If you have marines available in your transports, it is amazing how much use you can get out of them in conjunction with bombardment.

In other words, I have just concluded a game (vs. Mech Inf defenders) where I really appreciated having them, and regretted NOT having them in a couple of instances. I had transports with 6 marines and a couple support, and I had transports which always had a marine or two onboard should opportunity knock. Few transports did NOT have any marines with them. Sometimes there were preplanned missions, but often they were missions of opportunity.

[dworkin]

I use marines when speed is of the essence. With my crabby subjects whining how Joey has been sent off to die I need to achieve my objectives NOW!

So in go the marines to take some pile of rubble that AI calls a city. Well, it's rubble after battlefleet is through with it.

Marines are not affected by city bonuses if your fleet and air wing leave "no stone standing upon another".

[Admiral PJ]

Marines do seem a bit weak, though they are useful for harranging the enemys coasts(especially the small remote coastal cities)

The best use for them is if you don't have any oil, then they are your best attack unit (you need rubber of course).
This might happen more in multiplayer human games.

They ought to have a higher defence of 10/12 or be much cheaper.
They could be made as an all terrain as road unit, as marines are known for going on rough terrain.
They could also have a bombard ability to recreate the use of anti tank rockets and grenades (marines have light artilery normally anyhow), this would also allowthem to have artillery defence.

They have a Zone of control too, which can be pretty useful .. I've used this many times.

[Jaybe]

PJ, if you made those suggested editor changes then Marines are all you would see the AI produce.

Is that what you want?
(I considered doing it myself)

[Theseus]

I haven;t used Marines much myself (pains me to say that, being a leatherneck myself)... but Marine Armies??!!

Still my beating heart.

Naval picket lines just got waaaay more important. This will be major in MP... I hope Soren got a little pumped about this for the AI civs (especially the Vikings, but really every one once Amphib War has been researched).

[Gen.Dragolen]

Theseus,

Wait for it...
Alll Right, ladies, lock and load. Time to earn our pay and make the poor bastards piss their pants.

This should be an absolute howl when we can play head to head.

Imagine having two marine armies riding ashore with a fist full of battle ships, and carrier based bombers pasting the target city. Not even Mech Inf. would survive the assault...

And having Vikings doing the same ? If they wanted to increase the carnage, this will do it. The only thing is that the Vikings will have to have their transports look like longboats, or it just won't work.

"A viking we will a viking we will go... nice city. I'll take it..."

D.

[Meshelic]

Marines can take out infantry like nothing, but their cost is too high for their usefulness (especially in the era of tanks) and they are a dead end research thread. Too bad they couldn't have changed it to actually make a difference