| General | Hosted Sites | Civ5 | CivRev | Civ4Col | Civ4 | Civ3 | Civ2 | Civ1 | Misc | Marketplace |
![]() |
|
|
Welcome to Civilization Fanatics' Center. You are currently viewing our site as a guest which gives you limited access to our site features. By joining our free community, you will be able to participate in the discussions, search the forum, send private messages, vote in polls, upload your own screenshots to the gallery, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so sign up today! If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact support. |
|
|||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
|
#461 |
|
Frequent poster
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Medford, MA
Posts: 7,477
|
true. That would suck - but they will still have to either take a city or spend a turn getting stacks of modern armor beat on.
And MA aren't all that much more expensive than tanks, anyway.
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
#462 |
|
Councilor & Merlot Noble
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Washington State (GMT -8)
Posts: 8,197
|
Radar Artillery and Civil Defense buildings are both brilliant additions to the Yilar Entrenchment Scheme (The Y.E.S.
) According to my combat calculator, a Mech Infantry (12.18.2) would win, even against Modern Armor, 78% of the time in a city with Civil Defense. Obviously, this would be even better in a Metro with Civil Defense. EDIT: Bah - I forgot that a Modern Armor is a 3 move unit... that means they'd be able to retreat from combat with our Mech Infantry. So, basically - we're looking at 32% win, 31% retreat, and 36% lose to the Modern Armor. An attacking Marine would only have a 4.7% chance of killing a Mech Infantry in a city with Civil Defense. This would vastly reduce the number of Mech Infantry we need to hold against even a very determined assault. Of course, we'll need to maintain significant offensive forces/bombers in case they decide to land a stack of their own Mech Infantry and combat settlers. Too bad most of this goes out the window when FREE/Saber get nukes. I can't remember - in C3C does a nuke strike wipe out all the defenders? or just redline them?
__________________
~ C3C MTDG II ~
Advisor to the Council Concilio "I" non exceptet ~ BTS MTDG II ~ Loyal servant of the King, Empire of Merlot, House of W Illegitimi non carborundum ~ C3C MTDG I = Victory with MIA! ~ Civ4 MTDG I = Victory with Epsilon Team! ~ BTS MTDG I = Collapsed with team SANCTA ~ Last edited by General_W; Aug 26, 2008 at 04:24 PM. |
|
|
|
|
|
#463 |
|
Councilor & Merlot Noble
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Washington State (GMT -8)
Posts: 8,197
|
Hmm - sorry for the double post here - but I just stumbled across something pretty interesting.
When a Modern Armor [24.16.3] (120 shields) attacks a fortified Mech Infantry [12.18.2] (110 shields) in a City with Civil Defense (+135% defense) - the results are: Defender wins: 33.5%However, if we were defending with our own Modern Armor - we give up 2 base defense points - but we take away the enemies ability to retreat! In a Modern Armor vs. Modern Armor scenario, the results look like this: Defender wins: 61.3%So the attacker wins 7% more - but at the expense of of being destroyed nearly twice as often! Not only do we improve our kill ratio against any potential invaders - but we would also have a much stronger counter-attack threat / be ready to deal with landings outside of our cities. Perhaps we need to focus on building Modern Armor instead?
__________________
~ C3C MTDG II ~
Advisor to the Council Concilio "I" non exceptet ~ BTS MTDG II ~ Loyal servant of the King, Empire of Merlot, House of W Illegitimi non carborundum ~ C3C MTDG I = Victory with MIA! ~ Civ4 MTDG I = Victory with Epsilon Team! ~ BTS MTDG I = Collapsed with team SANCTA ~ Last edited by General_W; Aug 26, 2008 at 04:42 PM. |
|
|
|
|
|
#464 |
|
Fully Functional
![]() Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: 57°47'55"N 12°09'16"E
Posts: 9,708
|
Yes! Of course we do! It's been so long since I played with Modern Armors - they are awesome, and only marginally more expensive than MechInfs.
We should start building Tanks for upgrades then. Good thing SABER is headed for SynFibers.
__________________
G |- \x.e : t1 -> t <= G[x->t1] |- e : t ..... Economic: -5.88, Social: -5.90 (081218) Team Smurkz: BtS SGOTM 08 Wonderful Suryavarman MTDGs: Civ3 MTDG II - The Council | CIV MTDG II - Team Cavaleiros Current NESes: Pre-ChaNES - Peoples' Republic of China Undefeated Board Game Champion :|: DipNES2, Council Diplomacy, BlaDipNES, DipNES3, RiskNESII, RiskNESIII, DipEuropeII, DipWorldIII: Victory! |
|
|
|
|
|
#465 |
|
Prince
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Posts: 538
|
We should consider going wartime soon.
__________________
MP Civer
|
|
|
|
|
|
#466 |
|
Chieftain
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 6
|
I concur with the modern armor idea. Not only do they take away the enemies ability to retreat and allow for inland skirmishing, they can also be used for an invasion if need be, although it seems that an invasion would not be prudent right now.
I would also like to point out that (radar artillery soon?) artillery can really make a dent in the modern armor's health, so if we can allocate most of our artillery to the general area of their attack, our armor won't have to work so hard. A mutual nuclear protection pact would be a good idea. |
|
|
|
|
|
#467 |
|
Low level intermediary
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 12,874
|
I'm on the modern armor bandwagon. We need that tech treaty with SABER!
Do you mean mobilization or are you suggesting we go on an offensive?
__________________
Still playing after all these years. |
|
|
|
|
|
#468 |
|
King
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Asheville, NC
Posts: 830
|
^^I'm pretty sure Yilar means mobilization, but he'll correct me if I'm wrong. I think it might be a good idea after the remaining 5 turns of GA and these last few infrastructure builds complete. Especially since I think it unlikely Free will accept peace except for an alliance against Saber. They probably want to get modern armor asap since they have built so many tanks and will look to go offensive soon to prevent either a Saber or Council Spaceship win. GA shields on units until the end of war sounds pretty
![]() I would like to see a treaty worked out with Saber pretty soon as well. Put another on the modern armor bandwagon as long as naval and air superiority are maintained. |
|
|
|
|
|
#469 |
|
Frequent poster
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Medford, MA
Posts: 7,477
|
I think we should consider going active in our assault and start taking out transports.
I think we can safely assume that FREE is mobilized, or at least was. Transports do not get the shield bonus under mobilization, so those will always be the weak link in FREE's ability to make war - if they have no transports, I don't much worry about their ability to land units. We are, what - 40 turns from being able build all the parts? There is no doubt in my mind that FREE will attack someone before then, probably BABE first, since they are backwards. If they take out BABE in the next 15 turns or so, they will be very close to a domination win - they won't be there yet, but they will be close - take over the islands, then start taking coastal cities that are lightly defended...
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
#470 | ||
|
Low level intermediary
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 12,874
|
Quote:
Quote:
As for mobilization, that is tricky. We can't un-mobilize until we make peace with someone. I don't see FREE offering peace. If we're stuck in mobilization can we build Apollo? I know we discussed this before.
__________________
Still playing after all these years. |
||
|
|
|
|
|
#471 | |
|
King
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Asheville, NC
Posts: 830
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#472 | |
|
Prince
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Posts: 538
|
Quote:
I would advise AGAINST attacking free atm, we are VERY weak at home, and if free comes knocking on our door we are at risk of dying. We should finish up the things that can't be built under wartime (mobilization) quickly and switch to wartime. I don't think radar artilleries are worth it, while they do nice damage to units they cost the same as a modern armor, which can KILL the unit with very good odds. The only scenario where radars become variable is with units sitting on mountains and i would honestly rather use bombers for that. Lets not make the same mistake FREE did when they attacked us and give the enemy a chance to capture our units.
__________________
MP Civer
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#473 | |
|
flyball chaser
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Hamburg
Posts: 4,458
|
Quote:
![]() And the tricky thing about the "friend": WHO is our friend? Who is a friend of a nation close to win if being not friendly can spoil this victory? ![]() Right now I'd just trust BABE but it's also a friend you never can be sure that he survives the next turn. I'd hate to try to make such a deal with SABER (or FREE). They might stay at war just to spoil our plans. ![]() We'd suddenly find ourselves in a must-win-war a turn before we could launch with ten towns busy keeping their prebuilds...
__________________
It's only a game if you win but if you lose it's a stinking waste of time. [Al Bundy]
If a woman has to choose between catching a fly ball and saving an infant's life, she will choose to safe the infant's life without even considering if there are men on base. [unknown bachelor centerfielder] Last edited by Paul#42; Aug 27, 2008 at 05:10 AM. Reason: spelling |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#474 |
|
Prince
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Posts: 538
|
Either way I think we should start working on a plan to get into mobilization, maybe after nuclear power?
oh and the shields are not lost when you convert.
__________________
MP Civer
Last edited by Yilar; Aug 27, 2008 at 04:39 AM. |
|
|
|
|
|
#475 |
|
flyball chaser
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Hamburg
Posts: 4,458
|
We had already started a discussion on mobilization. Maybe we should discuss the topic over there.
Reading that thread reminds me that we should have gifted a town (The Stopgap) to GONG so they could hide a settler in our territory to keep ww up for FREE... ![]() Not sure if this would have been good style... ![]() But kuningas would certainly eat his keyboard while searching the world for the missing GONGers...
__________________
It's only a game if you win but if you lose it's a stinking waste of time. [Al Bundy]
If a woman has to choose between catching a fly ball and saving an infant's life, she will choose to safe the infant's life without even considering if there are men on base. [unknown bachelor centerfielder] |
|
|
|
|
|
#476 |
|
...
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Queens, New York
Posts: 10,293
|
Mobilization is too risky at this point...
What infrastructure builds do we need before we can start on Apollo? Also, I don't think that sinking Free's transports is wise quite yet. All that will do is serve to paint a target on us. Much better to hope that FREE goes after Babe, so that Saber and FREE will be forced to engage
__________________
"When faced with stupidity, I dont find 'critical thinking' useful." chiteng |
|
|
|
|
|
#477 |
|
Low level intermediary
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 12,874
|
So, if we need a friend, perhaps we should try to get a BABE settler smuggled over here. It would be quite ironic if this got to the point where BABE kept playing on just to help us.
__________________
Still playing after all these years. |
|
|
|
|
|
#478 |
|
Fully Functional
![]() Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: 57°47'55"N 12°09'16"E
Posts: 9,708
|
That would be totally brilliant!
__________________
G |- \x.e : t1 -> t <= G[x->t1] |- e : t ..... Economic: -5.88, Social: -5.90 (081218) Team Smurkz: BtS SGOTM 08 Wonderful Suryavarman MTDGs: Civ3 MTDG II - The Council | CIV MTDG II - Team Cavaleiros Current NESes: Pre-ChaNES - Peoples' Republic of China Undefeated Board Game Champion :|: DipNES2, Council Diplomacy, BlaDipNES, DipNES3, RiskNESII, RiskNESIII, DipEuropeII, DipWorldIII: Victory! |
|
|
|
|
|
#479 |
|
King
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Asheville, NC
Posts: 830
|
Gong had a settler to put on a boat we were going to send your way this turn, but never got the chance. Of course, if all out nuclear war had occured turning most of the world to a desert and stopping all VC's we would have wandered off somewhere to rebuild with all the 2-food irrigated desert tiles and attempted a comeback.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#480 |
|
Fully Functional
![]() Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: 57°47'55"N 12°09'16"E
Posts: 9,708
|
So what would be the best way? Resettle The Stopgap, and gift BABE some gold for rush-disbanding with a settler there?
__________________
G |- \x.e : t1 -> t <= G[x->t1] |- e : t ..... Economic: -5.88, Social: -5.90 (081218) Team Smurkz: BtS SGOTM 08 Wonderful Suryavarman MTDGs: Civ3 MTDG II - The Council | CIV MTDG II - Team Cavaleiros Current NESes: Pre-ChaNES - Peoples' Republic of China Undefeated Board Game Champion :|: DipNES2, Council Diplomacy, BlaDipNES, DipNES3, RiskNESII, RiskNESIII, DipEuropeII, DipWorldIII: Victory! |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
|
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| WW2 Grand strategy | Danielos | All Other Games | 4 | Jan 28, 2009 02:27 PM |
| Grand Strategy Question on my Game | LowEndUser | Civ3 - Strategy & Tips | 17 | Sep 30, 2006 08:38 AM |
| MIA Grand Strategy Meeting ! | General_W | Team M.I.A. | 692 | Sep 20, 2006 09:27 AM |
| Minesweeper Grand-Champion Thread | SirJethro | All Other Games | 43 | Dec 05, 2005 11:11 AM |
| Grand Vezeer of Foreign Affairs Nomination Thread | Paddy the Scot | Team TNT | 4 | Sep 06, 2005 05:08 AM |