Time to take out superior enemies, WW1 style?

[Frank Johnson]

I've seen alot of talk on these forums about attacking during earlier parts of the game, but I usually can't manage to take out everyone I'd like to that early in the game. Alot of the time when I play on Monarch, there will be a super power AI and eventualy it will come after me.

I've found that the computer's complete lack of skill in using massed artillery makes the ideal time to strike a superior civ the time inbetween Replacable Parts and Mobile Warfare.

When I've played a war during this period, the enemy sends all its mobile forces out ahead....and usually its out in the open and intercepted before they even get to a city. Besides at this point, cavalry is pretty much useless in my book, except to be sacrficed when I have the enemy infantry stack surrounded and low on HP.

But the crazy thing is when the infantry stack comes. It just marches in, by passing highly defended cities, charging into your interior to some weakly defended city. The trick is to put an infantry or 2 on defensive terrian near by the infantry stack so its always on low defense ground. Then once you've massed enough of your own infantry, completely surround the enemy infantry and fortfiy (usually you have rails so you can fortify the same turn). Of course I've been pumpling them with artillery the whole time as they head to the weakly defended city. Once surrounded, the enemy has to either charge your infantry at about 3 to 1 odds or worse....or sit there while you continue to pound them with artillery.

Enemy armies act really strangely when completely surrounded. They'll often fight, and take huge losses doing it. But the point is the longest period of time between mobile unit advances, and the point where the AI's lack of artillery skills is the most vital. Once the enemy is low on HP, it doesn't matter what you attack the infantry with usually. ^_^ The only bad thing I can think of is if the enemy gets battlefeild medience, but...usually artillery does more damage than they can heal, and the enemy army will charge your infantry anyway......losing massively.

[MrWhereItsAt]

Infantry and Artillery are fantastic units to get by then, and they can't be easily challenged before Tanks, if you use them right.

The thing with Cavalry is that they have their chance to retreat from battles to recover, so despite their lower attack value, in large numbers they can take out infantry if used loosely with few of their own casualties.

And in the early game I don't know how many opponents some of the greats here aim to take out, but for me one is enough. Even that gives me somewhere near double the civ most other civs are.

[Frank Johnson]

Well I always use the cavalry to attack first, when given the choice between cavalry and infantry. The cavalry does get away, even if its a slight percentage of the time now, plus usually I want the cavalry to die, if its dying usefully. They can't be upgraded, and they are spending money. Infantry and artillery can be upgraded, and I want to spend my resources building those.

Some other points I should have made before too....

Even if you are behind in tech a little bit, you can usually get to replaceable parts before an opponent can get to mobile warfare.

Also you can employ all your city defenders as an offensive infantry force, and replace the city defenders with conscripts as long as happiness allows.

[pedrojedi]

That event about surround enemy forces is true. I remember once when I made a living frontier barrier (lots of units), but I forgot only 1 spot... in the middle of a mountain chain. The enemy (egyptian b***tards!) came with at least 50-70 units, all IN THE SAME SPOT. I do not have to say that I annihilated their country basically because of such huge gigantic mistake, and that was the only thing that separated my victory from my oblivion.

[minke19104]

Just make long lines of infantry+altillery and recreate Trench warfare.

[Datajack Franit]

As if the french trench worked in the real world

[bongo]

It worked very well, forcing attackers to take heavy causalties.

[minke19104]

Their Fortification was the one that didnt work, The Maginot Line..

[Odin]

I did a stupid move in a recent game during the early Modern Times. I was carthage and the 2nd largest empire. Babylonia, my main adversary, was #1 in land size and had a lot of oil, but most of his central cities were in jungle. I had no sorces of oil, I get oil from China, who is on the SW boarder of Babylonia; Montezuma, Liz, and I were to the east of Babylonia; Greece was south of China. I had a MPP with Mao to make Hammurabi think twice before going to war. Hammurabi had a MPP with Alexander. I had started to build tanks so I could do a kind of "Shlieffen Plan" in which I could take a few Babylonian cities before I get Greek tanks landing on my east coast and had to concentrate on defending the homeland. When war began I imediately started my plan, but was horrified when I found I could no longer build Tanks, Mech. Inf., and Battleships. Hammurabi had pillaged the road to one of China's two sorces of oil! It was all downhill from there.

[pedrojedi]

That's why I always, ALWAYS try to guarantee my own source of coal, iron and oil. Got trashed down a good number of times because 1) the enemy cut down my lines or 2) the b***ard got my "ally" with him, and then I got 3-4-all civs vs. me. Rarely survive. If I manage to live through some peace treaties...

edit: english spelling mistake.

[Manya]

i've heard that infantry + artillery strategy many times, i think i'll use it then.

Pedrojedi, about those english spelling mistakes, i feel your pain

[The Mad Monk]

Originally posted by minke19104
Their Fortification was the one that didnt work, The Maginot Line..

What do you mean? It held. It was the strategic decisions that went along with it that led to the French defeat.

[bongo]

Was the maginot line ever tested in combat? Didn't the germans just circumvent it by going through belgium?

[minke19104]

Originally posted by bongo
Was the maginot line ever tested in combat? Didn't the germans just circumvent it by going through belgium?

That's what I meant..

[The Mad Monk]

That they chose to go around it rather than through it speaks volumes. That the French chose not to finish it (ending it only when they reached the northern coast, and then refused to account for the possibility of an end-run in their planning, was inexcusable.

[Chemical Ollie]

Originally posted by The Mad Monk


What do you mean? It held. It was the strategic decisions that went along with it that led to the French defeat.

What defeat? I thought Germany lost WW1? But the French took a heavy spanking, allright. The strategic mistake was to not have a Maginot line all the way to the English Channel.

On topic, I have found myself playing WW1 style in many games. And it works, if you have patience.

[bongo]

The maginot line was built after WW1.

WW1-style trench warfare can be very effective in civ-games. The point is of course to make the enemy waste lots of troops trying to break through your lines.

[Master Zen]

Personally I hate artillery, I find it rather worthless unless I bring a stack of like 20 to a city and that is very boooring, so I take my windows of opportunity with fast, mobile units.

My periods of warmongering are:

Ancient era:
Archer rush
only if I have a neighbour too close

Horseman rush
better than archer if you have horses, stack em with a Spearman or use them for more mobile hit and run. Works wonders with the Iroqouis, IMO the deadliest ancient era civ given horses.

Swordman
doesn't go well with most civs but with Carthage/Greece/Rome (make them Legions)/Persians (Immortals) is actually usefull and economical since you'll get a GA by using their UU in combo.

Early Medieval:
Knights
my favorite powerful on defense and offense, knights escorted by Musketmen (or better yet, Musketeers) are devastating. Their ability to retreat in combat is a huge plus, their high defense make it easy to move them aside a city (fortify one or two) and attack, you'll suffer heavy casualties but will lose hardly any units because of the retreat ability.

Late Medieval:
Cavalry
In theory they are just as effective as Knights but many AI cities will be over size 6 by now and artillery might be necessary to soften up these large ones. Since Nationalism is just around the corner, taking a shot with Cavalry is much more risky. The Ottomans have it slightly easier in this regards.

Industrial:
Tanks
Pretty much your last shot a quick mobile victory (i.e. with as little artillery as possible) especially soon after getting the tech since many civs have not yet converted all their riflemen to infantry.

WHAT I AVOID (these are my personal PoV of course )

WW1 style warfare. Too much artillery needed for my taste.

Notice that I have so far not mentioned modern warfare. MA's are not as powerful for taking cities without artillery support if only because the MI is so powerful on defense and many cities will be size 12+. The good thing about late industrial/modern warfare is aircraft, which IMO is more effective than ground artillery (and much more so than naval artillery).

Also, my gripes with artillery are only against cities. They are very effective against ground units in open terrain.

[Master Zen]

I think its obvious from the last posts that my "windows of opportunity" are the moment I get Chivalry until the enemy gets many Musketman principally. The worst period for warfare (well, offensive warfare) IMO is precisely the WW1 era.

But of course, this is not to say it isn't any fun...warmongering is fun no matter what!!

[Frank Johnson]

Well that's not the point. The point is that it is the worst time for fighting a war, thus its the best time to fight a superior super AI. Add in the AIs lack of artillery skills and you can turn around stuff easily.

[bongo]

I tried to do some WW1-style fighting in my current game. I filled 8 transport with infantry and artillery(33+31) and landed them in enemy territory. The AI left my SOD alone as long as I kept it united. This left me free to wander around and bombard and raze his cities at will. He tried to counter this by sending all availably units(cav+inf) overseas to my territory where they cause only minor damage...If the AI had consentrated his force on my SOD and were able to use artillery in an intelligent manner he could actually forced me out of his land.

[Hopdevil007]

i was recently playing a game where i took out the iroqous and at the far end of there land was an isthamus. it was a peice of land three tiles wide. i was ahead in railroading so i pulled some workers to make a kind of maginot line. i built forts and stacked three infantry and three artillery per tile. on the other side of my line the egyptians were gearing up to make war with me. when it finally did break out they threw everything they had at me and my boys didnt budge. it was great. i landed marines and tanks on there other side and devastated them. so in my opinion, the infantry/artillery combo for defense is very effective. no so much for attacking.

[badams52]

Originally posted by Master Zen
Personally I hate artillery, I find it rather worthless unless I bring a stack of like 20 to a city and that is very boooring, so I take my windows of opportunity with fast, mobile units.

Good list for those who don't use artillery

Notice that I have so far not mentioned modern warfare. MA's are not as powerful for taking cities without artillery support if only because the MI is so powerful on defense and many cities will be size 12+. The good thing about late industrial/modern warfare is aircraft, which IMO is more effective than ground artillery (and much more so than naval artillery).

Have to say I don't like bombers unless the AI doesn't have flight yet. Those fighters he builds wastes too many bombers!

Artillery and bombers are good to scare off the AIs naval ships from your coast and bring in the battleships to finish them off.

[Chemical Ollie]

Originally posted by badams52


Have to say I don't like bombers unless the AI doesn't have flight yet. Those fighters he builds wastes too many bombers!

Artillery and bombers are good to scare off the AIs naval ships from your coast and bring in the battleships to finish them off.

Not to mention that the AI actually has some skill in using bombers as opposed to using artillery. And that you could sink some ships if you play by AU rules.

[Master Zen]

The AI has a nasty habit of bombing your resource squares. Of course it also works if you do it yourself Doolittle-style. There was a thread a while back about this.

[badams52]

Originally posted by Olaf Hårfagre
Not to mention that the AI actually has some skill in using bombers as opposed to using artillery. And that you could sink some ships if you play by AU rules.

But again, just create some fighters, make them control the skies and watch the bombers be swatted like flies.

[VJ]

Bah, you only need to use artillery on big maps.

[Master Zen]

Originally posted by Tuomerehu
Bah, you only need to use artillery on big maps.

And A LOT of them, well, only after Replaceable Parts