How strong is late-game warmongering?

I'm talking Industrial to Modern Era, before XCOM and GDR.

I often want to focus on growth in early and mid, and then go warmongering in Industrial and Modern with tanks and fighter planes, but I don't get the feeling it's as strong of a strategy as going Swordsmen and taking nearby land early. This gives you a stronger base to build up on and lets you stay competitive with other civs going into Medieval and Renaissance.

I play a lot of MP, I don't mind defending early at all, but I prefer to launch surprise invasions lategame. However, I find these invasions are usually MUCH more thwartable though, no matter how prepared I thought I was. This is doubly true in MP. I often do much better showing up with 6 Swordsmen and 2 Cats early on, and taking their fledgling capital for myself. Even Renaissance wars feel a lot more purposeful and productive than conquering in later eras. Just give me a chance to use the cool units, I beg you! Make me NEED to build Battleships and Panzers and do an amphibious invasion!

I'm thinking turtle on 4 cities early with Tradition, build up an army, then conquer during Industrial (flattening those who would pose the most threat to me) then settling in for a Science Victory. Can I make this work as well as just rushing early and wiping out 1-2 Civs before Medieval?

May I suggest playing on Huge maps? All you mention isn't possible on huge maps unless you wipe out an neighbor that started real near to you. Even then the ones farther away have chance to build up.

I'll like to see how well you can deal with a runaway Iroquois which has researched every single tech and have the biggest military in the world while controlling half of the world.

Protip: You can't just kill them with six military units.

Callonia said:

May I suggest playing on Huge maps? All you mention isn't possible on huge maps unless you wipe out an neighbor that started real near to you. Even then the ones farther away have chance to build up.

I'll like to see how well you can deal with a runaway Iroquois which has researched every single tech and have the biggest military in the world while controlling half of the world.

Protip: You can't just kill them with six military units.

Click to expand...

I do often play on Huge maps, but to me it's kind of cheap. I like to play games in the gametypes they were balanced for (as you can imagine, I mod lightly). I think a human player has even more of an advantage on Huge maps.

Plus, this doesn't help in MP, where most games are on Small maps, played on Pangaea or Continents. I can often wall myself in and fortify, but the actual buildup and conquering is always problematic on 4 cities.

Promoted GDRs are really good though. With 4 of these you should be able to take most non-capital cities - without any support units. The problem for me is I don't usually get to use GDRs and Stealth Bombers for many turns as the AI tends to launch the Space Ship right about that time.

An army consisting of a 3 infantry, 4 modern armors, 2 GDRs and 2 Rocket Launchers is pretty much unstoppable, if you remember to bring those 2 Mobile SAMs with you. But, there is one problem that has killed many late game rushes for me - when the AI starts using nuclear missiles against your elite army. One time it only took Japan 10 turns to annihilate my *very* strong military I had been building and promoting throughout the game. 2 A-bombs and 4 Nuclear Missiles later I had all of three units left, and even those in very bad health.

the smaller the map, the shorter the time to victory. if you want to use modern era units, play huge.
also, AI get a bonus to happiness, which means on huge maps the AI will make lots of cities, which means more fighting until you could actually get to their capital.

If you play on huge maps, just toss in 21 civs. It'll fill the map nicely, and you'll still get a nice balance between early and lategame tension. Bombers and Artillery run the battlefield from the moment they enter.

Tyrus said:

I do often play on Huge maps, but to me it's kind of cheap. I like to play games in the gametypes they were balanced for (as you can imagine, I mod lightly). I think a human player has even more of an advantage on Huge maps.

Plus, this doesn't help in MP, where most games are on Small maps, played on Pangaea or Continents. I can often wall myself in and fortify, but the actual buildup and conquering is always problematic on 4 cities.

Click to expand...

MP sure, small maps is understandable.

However it is Firaxis's responsibility to make the AI good for huge maps. Anything smaller than huge is too small for me. Iroquois is one of the AIs that can flourish on them. Coincidentally, he is one of the best ais xD

Okay, I understand that playing on Huge maps move war further into the future, but is that all the advice you have to give?

I want to know about how strong late-game warmongering is on standard-size maps, where you may want to build up first, or your invasion got deflected, or you just met the civ, etc. How does it stack up with getting that war done earlier, in the first 4 eras?

Again, I'm not talking about XCOM and GDR game-enders.

Just play shoshone and everything will be ok


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

well, unless you start out isolated, you'll get a war in the first 4 eras, especially if you neglect your military. now, the question is do you hold back when you got declared early, or do you mount a counterattack and take the enemy's capital? if you do the latter every time you war, you'll run out of enemies by the modern eras. (except when you have 12+ civs in game, )

Very true actually


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well, that was an enlightening examination of this topic. Going to have to process all that feedback.

I personally find late game warmongering fun. Just make sure to have carriers with fighters to escort your battleships and fighters near the front line war, and some anti aircraft units. The only problem I have with late game warmongering is I usually just want the game finished by that time, and will go nuke crazy to end it fast.

"However, I find these invasions are usually MUCH more thwartable though, no matter how prepared I thought I was."

Well, to invade and successfully hold territory you generally need 3 times the amount of the force it's opposing you with. They oppose you with 5, you bring 15. That's the absolute minimum for 100% victory chances. Then the amount is modified further by lay of map and many variables.

Does this help?

To begin with, I'm not exactly sure what the OP is asking.

I was under the impression that the late game is where most of the warmongering is in BNW. That's when Artillery and Bombers come into play. Not to mention how huge warmongering penalties are in earlier eras, where taking just two cities in 500 BC can make you an international pariah for centuries.

The OP seems to be referring to MP, where the warmongering penalty would not apply, but warfare in MP games must be quite different from warfare against the AI.

These modern era wars have demands for all types of military units.... Mobile units can become important when you need to plunder stategic resources like uranium which can allow your opponents into building nuclear weapons. Anti air units also become important because there can be bombers and air units that can cheese themselves into your cities. Infantry units can often destroy artilleries better than cavalry but cavalry once upgraded can plunder better.