notyourtypical
Warlord
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2013
- Messages
- 119
I find that promoted melee is good against cities. Specifically, siege makes your units do a lot more damage while taking less in the process, and cover keeps them alive.
None of those are particularly good at taking out cities. Im not even sure if the impi spear throw affects cities. City strength appears to scale per era based on the seige units strength vs cities, which makes attacking them with anything else inefficient. Theres no point attacking a strength 40 city with strength 20 Mandekalu cavalry when you need trebs to do any decent damage.
The most efficient plan in the absence of special units (like seige towers, keshiks, etc) seems to be to just bomb it to pieces with ranged units and then move in one unit to take the city. Before you get range 3 units, that means using a melee shield to hopefully distract the AI while your seige units bomb the city to 0 hp.
I think a mod that lowers city strength would really help here, with a corresponding reduction in seige unit bonus vs cities. Anyone know of one? "Weaker cities" on steam workshop isnt getting any useful results...
Ranged naval excels against coastal cities because they have no setup time, no terrain movement costs and generally, no terrain blocking direct fire. Before you get frigates, it can get really annoying because galleons cant go into ocean tiles though. However naval units cant get seige bonuses so that kind of balances it out. I think one flaw of the core game is that land seige units dont get indirect fire till artillery, so that means before then a city in hilly terrain is near impossible to take. I had a city once in the middle of a large patch of hills + forest and the AI couldnt take it despite surrounding it with tons of units. But thats easy to fix with a indirect fire mod.
As it is, it can get really difficult to take coastal cities. Lets assume this is a intelligent player with his own navy + one land unit + one naval unit in the city. The city and its garrison should be enough to take out one frigate per turn alone, and in city strength scales MUCH better than naval strength. Arsenals come out a lot earlier than battleships and make large cities immune to frigates basically. For some reason there is a massive tech gap in naval units between frigates and battleships...i think it would really help if there was a ranged iron clad unit at the same time as you get melee ironclads.
Or you can bombard the city to 0 hp by firing on it every turn at 3 tiles with your artillery at no risk to yourself. Theres no reason to waste time healing unless you have extra tanks sitting around who could use the xp.
Also not really related, but i just saw a mod on the workshop that claims to fix a cover bug where it doesnt work for ranged units. Does anyone know if thats true for BNW?
The discussion that led the author to create that mod was post-BNW.
I can take 20 turns to clear an entire pangaea with lightning warfare tanks. Good luck doing it with artillery.
5: Clearly I can see that you never had a horde of german panzers before. You will roll anything with while ranged
units struggle to keep up XD
Hmm i see. Is there a list of bugs out there that we need mods to fix?
<snip>
Anyways, I really hate how Civfanatics forum posters on average act like Ranged unit is the one and true god.
Both units is perfectly viable.
<snip>
Sure, ranged unit rise in importance if you're fighting against Deity AI but Deity AI is just a bunch of cheating losers that can't fight without obnoxious amount of advantages over players anyways.
When you get tanks you also get bombers. With the first being penalized against cities and the second having bonuses against them and a decidedly better freedom of action I don't see many reasons to spam tanks instead of bombers, especially when they both require oil. I only need about 3 tanks in total.
Of course at that point land based ranged units become pointless, but the melee units' role doesn't change.
Tanks over bombers any day. Tanks have no city penalty, no stacking limit, and can attack cities far away. Bombers are limited to range, number, does less damage to cities than tanks and cannot capture. You can win a domination game much faster with tanks than bombers. I think there's a guide somewhere in the forums that teaches you just that.When you get tanks you also get bombers. With the first being penalized against cities and the second having bonuses against them and a decidedly better freedom of action I don't see many reasons to spam tanks instead of bombers, especially when they both require oil. I only need about 3 tanks in total.
Of course at that point land based ranged units become pointless, but the melee units' role doesn't change.