Military unit question..

[OwnTheWorld]

Does anyone here have an explaination why when you go into battle with another AI that a superior military unit, say like a advanced tank can be beaten by archers or spearmen? Tell me how in the world even if you have 30 archers to one tank can they inflict damage onto the tank?

I have always thought this to be a big blunder of civ III, you do not get a true advantage of technology when going into warfare with a backwards AI!

[thetrooper]

If you knew the outcome of every battle the game would be pretty boring IMHO.

Bad RNG rolls, you'll just have to live with it. And remember the ones in which you have outrageous fortune

[Hunter Noventa]

Ideally there would be an era modifier added to the outcome of the RNG, but there isn't. Doesn't make much sense I know, but you could say they snuck over in the night and poured sugar in the fuel tank if it makes you feel better.

[vmxa]

I am a proponent of the old fire power in Civ2, but they wanted to make obsolete unis be effective to help struggle civs. I do not agree with this, but that is what we have.

So you get some ugly results. These mostly work against the human, because you will not be using vastly inferior troops as much as the AI. Even at sid you will find a way to offset it with bombarment or armies.

So we see more of our best units losing to those that they should not, it is not a big deal. It does lead to rants now and then though.

[wilbill]

Originally Posted by OwnTheWorld

Does anyone here have an explaination why when you go into battle with another AI that a superior military unit, say like a advanced tank can be beaten by archers or spearmen?

Congratulations!! You're the 10,000th member to ask that question on CFC!! You win

Seriously, the answer is "that's just how it is." It probably shouldn't be and hopefully it won't be in Civ 4, but we're stuck with it in Civ 3. In the long run it evens out, you'll get just as many breaks from the RNG as the AI gets. In the meantime, go over to the Creation & Customization forums and download one of the Combat Calculators. It'll keep you from throwing away units needlessly in battles you have little chance of winning.

[Tank_Guy#3]

They could kill the tank only if they were able to get on top of it, I think.

[rysingsun]

Originally Posted by OwnTheWorld

Does anyone here have an explaination why when you go into battle with another AI that a superior military unit, say like a advanced tank can be beaten by archers or spearmen? Tell me how in the world even if you have 30 archers to one tank can they inflict damage onto the tank?

definition of archer: someone trained in archery. but just because someone is trained in archery does not mean he has lost his creativity to deal with the situation at hand. and it is unrealistic to suppose that an army of obsolete units will never get its hands on modern weapons captured from the enemy or bought on a black market. every rebel army no matter how low their technology manages to get their hands on black market (or otherwise) antitank rockets or mines. if not that then the old stand by the molotov cocktail will work. the american indians had at their disposal modest numbers of rifles even at a time when most of the american army was outfitted with muskets. its just unrealistic to assume that they will remain so obsolete that they have nothing to do in war but shoot arrows or spears at tanks.

the civ II model was ok but to me it had some serious flaws. the power of an army was so dependent on technology that technology absolutely overshadowed every other aspect of the game. there simply was no purpose for me to go to war in most of those games until i had obtained howitzers or spies or both and after that i could just romp over the enemy like he wasnt even there. civ III brought back the war strategy that civ II had lost.

[nullspace]

I can't believe that people seriously complain about losing a tank or two in a war that crushes an entire civilization, even if that civ is behind in tech. If you think it's unrealistic, I'd say that conquering a nation and not losing a single vehicle or soldier is much more unrealistic.

No matter how pathetic your enemy is, a war that conquers an entire civilization is going to cause some damage to you army. Accidents, weather, mechanical breakdowns, desertion, friendly fire, disease, sabotage, and tons of other things can cause losses of vehicles or men in war. However, in civ, the only way to lose a unit is in combat. So, "spearman beats tank" might not be realistic, but the big picture (losing a few units in a war) is perfectly realistic to me.

[SJ Frank]

Originally Posted by OwnTheWorld

Tell me how in the world even if you have 30 archers to one tank can they inflict damage onto the tank?

Give me 30 well trained men, 1 year of time (1 game turn), and a 100 mile x 100 mile area to operate in (1 game tile), and I WILL give you a 2 ton piece of scrap metal that used to be a tank

[Parabellum]

Originally Posted by OwnTheWorld

Does anyone here have an explaination why when you go into battle with another AI that a superior military unit, say like a advanced tank can be beaten by archers or spearmen? Tell me how in the world even if you have 30 archers to one tank can they inflict damage onto the tank?

I have always thought this to be a big blunder of civ III, you do not get a true advantage of technology when going into warfare with a backwards AI!

You can GUIDE the tanks to a trap, a impassable terrain or something like that. (a rift, marsh, etc..) so it will become useless metal rubble. There are so many examples of stupidities: some years ago a shepherd armed with a sling and a stone attacked a light helicopter of the U.S.A. ("becuase it was bothering his sheeps with the noise", as he said) and hit the rotor with the stone - The helicopter had to go down slowly and stop for repairs in the middle of the hills! - that happened in Spain.

So ¿what do you think? Think twice before saying that something is impossible... A stupid general can make so many mistakes...

[Rohili]

I don't really mind it too much... the "spearman defeats tank" doesn't happen often enough for it to become really too much of an issue.