The Stack o' Doom: Effective Composition and Use of Offensive Military Stacks

Alot of great stuff in there :goodjob:

One thing I must ask (or add.... depending), isn't it a good idea to divide your city attacking stacks?

See, too many times I've brought a massive stack close to an opponents city and had it pelted with seige units. So then I'm stuck with ~12 guys who are all too weak to be effectivley attacking a city.

What I've been doing in recent games is starting with the one big stack in my territory, and as the stack moves closer to the city to be conquered I begin to separate and spread out. Usually I am left with 3-4 stacks each with a seige or two, a defender or two, and an attacker or two. This way I can be sure that my entire assault won't be thwarted by a couple lousy seige units.

There are exceptions to this of course, if I see my opponent has no seige on his city but instead has alot of attacking units (elephants or knights or something) then I'll definatley stay as one big stack. However, usually I find the AI's do keep some seige laying around and as long as you defend each of your ~3 stacks properly the AI won't try (or wont be very successful trying) to attack you.
 
Spiral said:
One thing I must ask (or add.... depending), isn't it a good idea to divide your city attacking stacks?

A catapult can only hit 5 enemies with collateral damage. So if you have 3 stacks of size 6, you are not any more resistant to collateral damage than if you have one stack of size 18.

Of course, the AI might behave more stupidly in one case than the other. But it's not a direct consequence of the combat system.
 
o rly!?:eek:

So the only circumstances in which separating would be beneficial would be if you could separate to about 3 units per stack, but then you are just asking to have one of your stacks attacked and taken out.

Huh..... I fail to see how firaxis thought an AoE capped at 5 units would prevent the stack of doom.....

Is 5 units the cap for all seige? Cannons/artillery and the like.
 
Spiral said:
Is 5 units the cap for all seige? Cannons/artillery and the like.

Catapults are 5. Most siege units and airstrikes are 6. Artillery is 7. (These are for collateral damage, so that's in addition to the damage to the target of the attack.)
 
How are victims of collateral damage selected?
 
How are victims of collateral damage selected?

Random



So many bad concepts in this post that i see (not from article). Splitting a stack to avoid colateral damage is a no-no. First of all cats only hit up to 6 units with collaterals. So assume you attack a well defended city with a rather big stack. If you split your stack in little stacks of 3-4 the defender is just gonna send 1 or 2 cats at one of the stacks and then start wiping em with the appropriate unit. But if your units are in a stack of 15-20 with a medic in it, if he send a catapult you still have defenders in your stack at 100% effectiveness and can take the time to heal while reducing city defense.

Next thing is about the barrage catapults. Personaly i think this is a huge waste and wouldnt recommend this promotion AT ALL. First off it takes a big setup to have those 4 catapults with these promotions and also you can reduce defense the good old way... City raider 2 cats are a MUCH MORE usefull and efficient. You dont HAVE TO reduce it all the way to 0%. If there is an huge garrison, youre gonna get attacked by cats. You need the time for your medics units to do the job. If theres not an impressive garrison, well just suicide 1 or 2 cats and take the freaking city.
My point is : dont have to absolutly reduce the defense to 0% AND if you HAVE TO you will have the time to do it slowly with catapults that are actually usefull for something else that bombarding.

And last is the disturbing concept about smaller army and eliminating stacks of doom. After the ages were mens were doing wars with spears and clubs, armies were always big to actually face off an army in the field. Number was crucial and bigger was better. Smaller armies are not faster and more efficient than bigger armies. If the bigger armies are slower is ONLY because they lack the LOGISTICS. period. no point in trying to remove the concept of SoD. In the real world we call a Stack of Doom ... (drum rolls) ... an Army.
 
And last is the disturbing concept about smaller army and eliminating stacks of doom. After the ages were mens were doing wars with spears and clubs, armies were always big to actually face off an army in the field. Number was crucial and bigger was better. Smaller armies are not faster and more efficient than bigger armies. If the bigger armies are slower is ONLY because they lack the LOGISTICS. period. no point in trying to remove the concept of SoD. In the real world we call a Stack of Doom ... (drum rolls) ... an Army.

Well yes, almost. If the earth is warm and habitable it is ONLY because of the sun. Period. Logistics were a decisive factor in an army's performance and movement in most wars, from Alexander to Iraq. Another reason large armies move more slowly is bottlenecks in terrain, bridges and roads.

As far as gameplay goes, I agree with you. I try to have all my units moving through enemy territory together, and if some are moving in a smaller stack or alone to converge at the city I get nervous that those units will be swarmed and destroyed.
 
Well, against artillery it could be a different story altogether. Splitting up your stacks into marine-defended groups can really save you in the face of 7-unit collateral damage apiece. Unless your stack is that big.
 
Well, against artillery it could be a different story altogether. Splitting up your stacks into marine-defended groups can really save you in the face of 7-unit collateral damage apiece. Unless your stack is that big.

if you have 1 unit stacks, you will lose a few in 1-1 fights = as many units lost on both sides.
+ a marine is not defending well against air strikes or tanks (or even infantry).
If you have marines, put them on boats, and you'll face no colateral damages at all ;)
 
if you have 1 unit stacks, you will lose a few in 1-1 fights = as many units lost on both sides.
+ a marine is not defending well against air strikes or tanks (or even infantry).
If you have marines, put them on boats, and you'll face no colateral damages at all ;)

I don't understand. What I mean to say is if you have a stack of about 15 units, the enemy can throw several artillery at you and totally overwhelm that stack with collateral damage, while he would be forced to divide his scuicide artillery against 3 stacks of 5 or kill only one of those stacks. And marines have +50% bonus against artillery, making them the best defenders in this situation. Of course, you'd be bringing along other units, right?
 
I don't understand. What I mean to say is if you have a stack of about 15 units, the enemy can throw several artillery at you and totally overwhelm that stack with collateral damage, while he would be forced to divide his scuicide artillery against 3 stacks of 5 or kill only one of those stacks. And marines have +50% bonus against artillery, making them the best defenders in this situation. Of course, you'd be bringing along other units, right?
IIRC, the Marine's anti-Artillery bonus is in effect only when attacking Artillery, not when defending against it (like the Grenadier's bonus vs. Riflemen).

Remember that while the collateral damage victims are chosen at random, the defenders are not. If you have a big enough stack with enough defensive units, the City Raiders will not get chosen to defend. It takes a lot of collateral suicide attacks to actually kill off a stack. And I've noticed the AI seems to like keeping some siege units holed up in its cities, which could actually make sense if your stack is not adjacent to one, i.e. keeping the unit in reserve for when the city actually comes under direct attack (if only the AI actually used them for that purpose, instead of city defense :rolleyes: ).
 
I don't understand. What I mean to say is if you have a stack of about 15 units, the enemy can throw several artillery at you and totally overwhelm that stack with collateral damage, while he would be forced to divide his scuicide artillery against 3 stacks of 5 or kill only one of those stacks. And marines have +50% bonus against artillery, making them the best defenders in this situation. Of course, you'd be bringing along other units, right?

IIRC, the Marine's anti-Artillery bonus is in effect only when attacking Artillery, not when defending against it (like the Grenadier's bonus vs. Riflemen).

Remember that while the collateral damage victims are chosen at random, the defenders are not. If you have a big enough stack with enough defensive units, the City Raiders will not get chosen to defend. It takes a lot of collateral suicide attacks to actually kill off a stack. And I've noticed the AI seems to like keeping some siege units holed up in its cities, which could actually make sense if your stack is not adjacent to one, i.e. keeping the unit in reserve for when the city actually comes under direct attack (if only the AI actually used them for that purpose, instead of city defense :rolleyes: ).

what Sisiutil said.
+
the AI rarely uses enough colateral to really bring down a stack. So if you keep you 15 units stacked, you're very likely to lose no unit.
If you spread it thin you will lose some, with a usual rate of 1 loss for 1 win.
+
marines are safe on the boat, and it's futile to make them unboard for the attack
If you want to defend a stack in the age of artillery you'd better have
- some (3?) infantry+ with guerilla promotions and on a hill
- loads of siege units (immune to colateral!)
 
IIRC, the Marine's anti-Artillery bonus is in effect only when attacking Artillery, not when defending against it (like the Grenadier's bonus vs. Riflemen).

You're right. Must be one of those times I was half asleep. I remembered the effectiveness of SEALs in defending against artillery and thought that it might apply to normal marines too. I guess those first strikes were what helped.

Sisiutil said:
Remember that while the collateral damage victims are chosen at random, the defenders are not. If you have a big enough stack with enough defensive units, the City Raiders will not get chosen to defend. It takes a lot of collateral suicide attacks to actually kill off a stack. And I've noticed the AI seems to like keeping some siege units holed up in its cities, which could actually make sense if your stack is not adjacent to one, i.e. keeping the unit in reserve for when the city actually comes under direct attack (if only the AI actually used them for that purpose, instead of city defense :rolleyes: ).

I've gotten decimated by artillery when I put all my units in one stack. Sometimes the AI seems to have tons of those and would throw all at you in a single turn. After a few attacks, you start seeing the artillery actually kill your units. And then all is lost.
 
I've gotten decimated by artillery when I put all my units in one stack. Sometimes the AI seems to have tons of those and would throw all at you in a single turn. After a few attacks, you start seeing the artillery actually kill your units. And then all is lost.

That's happened to me, usually when I've divided my invasion force or relied too much on a tech lead and invaded with too few support troops.
 
I've gotten decimated by artillery when I put all my units in one stack. Sometimes the AI seems to have tons of those and would throw all at you in a single turn. After a few attacks, you start seeing the artillery actually kill your units. And then all is lost.

the best counter to this is to have enough artillery of your own ;)
 
I've gotten decimated by artillery when I put all my units in one stack. Sometimes the AI seems to have tons of those and would throw all at you in a single turn. After a few attacks, you start seeing the artillery actually kill your units. And then all is lost.
That's a good point, and one that I forgot because I was thinking of the earlier stages of the game. For some reason the AI seems to loathe Catapults, Trebuchets, and even Cannons, never building nor attacking with enough of them, but it just freakin' adores Artillery. And aelf is right, a massed Artillery attack can be devastating to a stack.

The AI's love of Artillery has two contributing factors I think. First off is the fact that it's on the path to Rocketry and the space race. Second is a simple strength calculation; Artillery is stronger than any other unit the AI can build at that time, and does collateral damage as a bonus.
 
That's a good point, and one that I forgot because I was thinking of the earlier stages of the game. For some reason the AI seems to loathe Catapults, Trebuchets, and even Cannons, never building nor attacking with enough of them, but it just freakin' adores Artillery. And aelf is right, a massed Artillery attack can be devastating to a stack.

Yup. I think artillery really ups the ante of the collateral damage game. Bombers might be more efficient, but it is artillery that the AI loves to build. Better take measures against it, and one big stack to absorb all the damage is probably not the way most of the time.
 
Yup. I think artillery really ups the ante of the collateral damage game. Bombers might be more efficient, but it is artillery that the AI loves to build. Better take measures against it, and one big stack to absorb all the damage is probably not the way most of the time.

yes it is!
in your stack you need :
- artillery (5 is a minimum)
- MG (2 is enough)
- your big infantry, tanks, whatever stack
- a good medic
Why?
because those 2 categories are immune to colateral damage,
and artillery can defend vs artillery after the first few colateral damaging attacks
while MG will defend vs infantry and such with some success.
Of course, if you need to defend against mech inf, you're better sitting in your boats.
 
yes it is!
in your stack you need :
- artillery (5 is a minimum)
- MG (2 is enough)
- your big infantry, tanks, whatever stack
- a good medic
Why?
because those 2 categories are immune to colateral damage,
and artillery can defend vs artillery after the first few colateral damaging attacks
while MG will defend vs infantry and such with some success.
Of course, if you need to defend against mech inf, you're better sitting in your boats.

I thought siege always defend last? Maybe not machine guns, but you only have two of those. They will die and you other troops will die too, leaving your artillery alone and exposed. They may not have suffered collateral damage thus far, but they will still likely die.
 
I thought siege always defend last?
not after 2.08
Maybe not machine guns, but you only have two of those. They will die and you other troops will die too, leaving your artillery alone and exposed. They may not have suffered collateral damage thus far, but they will still likely die.

MG won't defend against artillery. artilleries will.
and the MG will deter the AI to attack with gunpowder units.
Of course, if he has tanks running around or gunships, you will lose a lot of units. But then again, you cannot expect to win an offensive war with totally inferior units, can you?
 
Top Bottom