reddishrecue
Some dude on civfans
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2009
- Messages
- 6,213
I have built them before though, and when I did, occupying cities was so easily done.
Does anyone build Giant Death Robots?
- Thread starter Sharples
- Start date
lindsay40k
Emperor
Even if I'm on a Space Race where this tech might crop up, they're not as useful as ranged & air units and Xcom deep insertion forces. Most of my games are a Cultural win three turns after beelining Internet, or a military victory gained with Range Logistics Crossbows.
What they ARE good for, however, is gifting a bunch (plus a Uranium subsidy) to a civ you've liberated and is being invaded by a warmonger. Last thing the British expect is Gandhi sending out Megatron!
What they ARE good for, however, is gifting a bunch (plus a Uranium subsidy) to a civ you've liberated and is being invaded by a warmonger. Last thing the British expect is Gandhi sending out Megatron!
Primacide
Settler
I'm sorry to do this to y'all, but any discussion of the GDR requires that you read about their sordid history:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=84982&page=3
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=84982&page=3
I feel like they were great until XCOM units showed up and suddenly GDR's seemed a bit less important.
Primacide
Settler
Giant Death Robots are important!!!
Your life is small and weak, the giant death robots are huge and strong. Do not compare your silly x-crap to the GDR of dooooooooooom.
Your life is small and weak, the giant death robots are huge and strong. Do not compare your silly x-crap to the GDR of dooooooooooom.
joe_the_dead
Chieftain
Can't remember the last time i built a GDR, maybe once or twice i did so. But my games tend to be really long and i acutally like that a lot and so i sometimes get one from a City-state i think.
Sharples
Prince
Dammit, you saw through my thread!
More speed or upgrade from Modern Armor....or Rocket Artillery and whichever they upgrade from determines if they are ranged or melee. Lets see how one's city fares against 4 range/logistics GDRs that can move 8 tiles at a time while ignoring terrain costs.
Finarvi
Prince
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2015
- Messages
- 531
Never used GDR at all. For me 300 turn-game is extremely long. I think that there's more fun in winning and starting new game than in waiting to research every tech.
But if I'd get Nuclear Fusion I'd build them for sure. The look giant. And deadly.
I never use Uranium anyway (except nuclear power stations). Maybe I'm weird but I like conquering not destroying
But if I'd get Nuclear Fusion I'd build them for sure. The look giant. And deadly.
I never use Uranium anyway (except nuclear power stations). Maybe I'm weird but I like conquering not destroying
And robotic!
I've built a few but not many, for many of the reasons already mentioned.
True, XCOM paradrop range is 40 hexes in any direction, which is about a third of a standard sized map. However, they can paradrop more than once, even on consecutive turns, provided they start the turn in controlled territory and take no action prior to dropping. So, if the target city is out of range from their spawn point, just drop into some controlled territory in that general direction (which you will almost certainly have by this point in the game since using them for this purpose indicates domination intentions) and the next turn drop again into the target destination-- compared to waiting 5-30 turns for a GDR to reach it's location.
Here's my problems w/ GDRs:
1.) The 2nd-level information age technologies (i.e. the rightmost vertical column on the tech tree save future tech) are technologies designed to "wrap things up":
-tech win: wrap up by accessing the last two SS units
-culture win: if you couldn't snag the appropriate wonders AND you got unlucky with antiquity locations, internet wraps it up
-diplo win: a few votes shy of UN victory? reassign your spies as diplomats and then globalization wraps things up.
which brings us to...
-domination games: there's three flavors of wrapping things up using 2nd-level infoage techs, but two are almost instantaneous and one which takes forever:
a.)Stealth- Sbombers annihilate all units and bring city strength down to 0, allowing a fast paper unit to walk in and take the cities. A 1hp horseman is just as effective as a full strength modern armor for this strategy
b.)Nanotech: build/buy as many paratroopers as possible just before getting this technology (no resource restriction), then upgrade all on the very turn it's discovered. drop 4-6 XCOMs per remaining capital in the next 1-2 turns, game is over on the following turn.
c.)Fusion: build/buy the quintessential CoD. However, the level of power-obscenity you can achieve is directly related to how much the map-gods smiled on you with uranium, and regardless of how much you have you're going to have to turn-click dozen(s) of times to reach the destination (which at this point in the game can translate to quite a bit of thumb-twiddling.)
2.) When I choose to play aggressively, the way that I play (which I'm pretty sure is how most of us play) involves turtling until I have the necessary infrastructure (mostly an acceptable GPT and/or HPT level as well as the start of a tech lead) and pull the trigger on a campaign that doesn't stop until the world is mine. I always prefer to pull the trigger as soon as possible, and this opportunity is controlled by 3 factors- how well I play, how good my leader's advantages are, and how well the map sets me up.
When I'm doing well, this starts with a composite bow rush. If the start wasn't as favorable, it might have to wait until crossbows or cannons.
But even the worst performances on immortal and deity, where I have to turtle all the way into the industrial era, get things going (and at a rate intended to catch-up) with the fire-with-impunity artillery unit and some meat shields in front of it, further expedited by air support if it gets that deep. It's in these games that we might actually reach the information age, not because anything stronger is needed but simply because the industrial era units haven't gotten the job done... yet. I consider games that go this deep to be failures, and am looking to finish and move on as quickly as possible. With that in mind, it can be very helpful to have a unit that can remove any other unit from almost anywhere (Sbombers mostly, also guided missiles) or a unit that can get to the destination instantly (XCOMS). Having a unit, albeit a significantly stronger one, that requires mind-numbing turn-clicking before it can contribute is not nearly as helpful in these "failure to achieve victory by target-time" scenarios.
What kind of strategy do you use for guided missiles? I've always found them too week to justify using them in mass.
Here I thought it might be the Spanish Inquisition.
Anyway, no, not really. The last time I built one of those was just for its novelty. That was when I was only a few turns away from winning a science victory anyway.
phillipwyllie
Wannabe Deity
That I never knew. If it is true I'll be trying them out more often.
Sedwick
Parent, then Civ'er
Or why XCOM should be nerfed?
They are weak, but they're soooooo cheap.
My heaviest production cities can often insert one into the build queue when they are in the middle of a larger project, build it in one turn and sometimes have enough overflow that they don't lose a turn to complete the larger project. Sometimes they build one every other turn. I just make a note to myself somewhere, "Rostov makes missiles on odd-numbered turns."
Alternatively, if you have smaller cities (which you probably shouldn't have at this stage of the game, but it happens... annex, etc.) there's often a question about what to put in their build queues-buildings would take forever/cost maintenance/contribute inconsequentially, proper units would just take too long. Missiles are a way for them to contribute as a.) they're cheap enough to get out in a smaller city, and b.) as missile units they don't need training buildings.
Or, if you have the trifecta of military purchasing (Big Ben/mercantilism/mobilization), they're about 200 gold.
As far as what to use them for, it's pretty much the exact same utility as bombers, and it's preferential to use bombers so they get the XP. However, bombers use oil, missiles don't. So they're a good option if you are oil-poor, or you have lots of tanks and/or battleships, or if the ranged support of your bombers simply isn't getting the job done as well as you'd like.
The most important rule-of-thumb with missiles is to never own one for more than a half-dozen turns. They are cheap, one-shot units and as such you don't want to be paying maintenance on them. Stockpiling missiles will destroy your economy.
BustaSlaya
Chieftain
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2014
- Messages
- 32
I'll buy them with gold if I'm still waiting for victory.
They're an efficient and fun way to get those former-superpower-now-pauper civs to stop taunting, and stop talking.
They're an efficient and fun way to get those former-superpower-now-pauper civs to stop taunting, and stop talking.
Thanks for showing me possibly the worst thread in history.
The only buff the GDR logically requires is the ability to carry guided missiles which it could discharge Impi-style before making its melee attack.
