Archer-Archer or Counterinfantry-Countercav?

[futurehermit]

I'm curious what people usually do to defend their cities. I'm not talking about cities deep in your empire that can be guarded until 2000AD with your starting warrior.

I'm talking about contested cities that require at least 2 defenders to avoid getting sacked by a wandering horse-based unit.

Do you think it's better (define better how you like) to defend with 2 archer-type units (e.g., archer-archer or longbow-longbow) or with a counter cav and a counter infantry unit (e.g., axeman-spearman or xbow-pikeman)?

I usually go the latter route, but archers are cheaper and general defenders with city garrison promotions. It's just that in my experience a shock axe will do better against an attacking sword say than an archer and a combat 2 pike will do better against an attacking knight than a longbow. Of course if multiple swords attack then the axe will do well but the spear not so well.

Anyways, what do you think?

[Helmling]

Well, a mixed stack is always best, and it really depends on what you might be facing. If it's "wandering horse-based" units that are your likely foes then I'm lucky in that I always play as Greece and Phalanxes are solid defenders against horse-based units all the way to Knights. For the era you seem to be talking about it's good to toss in a good archer w/ city defense, an axeman for melee and a spearman for anti-cavalry. I rarely go that far, though, and tailor my defenses to what my neighbors seem capable of throwing at me.

[gettingfat]

To start with, I don't think 2 defenders per border city is sufficient to boost your power rating high enough to stop those opportunistic attacks.

If a choice has to be made, say due to limited resource, I'll go for an archer-countercav combo. What I usually fear is not the city being taken down. A 40-50% defence city defended by 2 CG long-bows can stop 3-4 knights with decent chance. What I'm afraid more is the pillaging, so a spear or pike is necessary. 1 archer with CG promotion will serve as the stopper to buy time. Melee units are less fearsome because they are slow. By the time they get to your city you will have enough time to whip and mobilize for counterunits.

[DaveMcW]

Pile of mixed units in border cities. Counter-cav in interior cities.

[Sjaramei]

Don't think defense. Make big stack with lots of catas and lots of axes/swords and kill him before he can pillage you

[Naismith]

Obviously more defenders would be nice. But I will stick to the limit of two defenders. I assume the city isn't totally isolated, and reinforcements can arrive in a couple of turns. Your main purpose isn't anti-pillaging, it is defending the city. I also assume your neighbor has both copper/iron and horses.

If the city is on a hill, either two archers or an archer and a spear. If the city is not on a hill, then an archer and a spear.

As gettingfat mentioned, you can see the swordsmen coming, so you should be able to bring reinforcements in that case. The spear is nice if your problem really is an isolated, pillaging horseman. Then you just take him out with the spear.

[fed1943]

When you think "my city" is just the city'site or also the important radius
tiles?

If the latter, mixed stack.

Best regards,

[DigitalBoy]

I have two archers/gunpowder in each city, plus extra (offensive) units wherever I suspect an invasion may happen (including cities by coasts).

[Moxxa]

I usually defend border cities with war elephants if I can, otheriwse CG units and anti-cav units.

[axident]

Originally Posted by futurehermit

I'm curious what people usually do to defend their cities. I'm not talking about cities deep in your empire that can be guarded until 2000AD with your starting warrior.

I'm talking about contested cities that require at least 2 defenders to avoid getting sacked by a wandering horse-based unit.

Do you think it's better (define better how you like) to defend with 2 archer-type units (e.g., archer-archer or longbow-longbow) or with a counter cav and a counter infantry unit (e.g., axeman-spearman or xbow-pikeman)?

I usually go the latter route, but archers are cheaper and general defenders with city garrison promotions. It's just that in my experience a shock axe will do better against an attacking sword say than an archer and a combat 2 pike will do better against an attacking knight than a longbow. Of course if multiple swords attack then the axe will do well but the spear not so well.

Anyways, what do you think?

I hate passive defense because it just results in your looking at the enemy pillage everything nearby, but they do give your "active" defenders time to heal in-between their forays out into the field. So a CG-promoted defender or two is nice. A non-CG unit should have a Medic promo too; maybe give it to a spearman.

The rest depends a lot on exactly what you're facing--if you expect mounted units, go spear/pike/Impi/whatever, if you expect siege, make sure you also have siege in that city to cream any stack that shows up with siege units in it. There is no worse feeling in the world than having a pair of CG longbowmen and a pair of pikeman staring at a mixed stack of crossbows, macemen, mounted units, and trebuchets.

In the modern era, I just spam tanks, or Modern Armor when available, with lots and lots Drill promotions; they serve as both offense and defense. The red cross city flies a trickle of Medic-promoted marines, or Mech Inf if available. I started doing this after noticing that when the enemy attacked a recently-captured city, my Drill IV Modern Armors were usually selected to defend first anyway, rather than my Mech Inf.

P.S. I usually leave at least one flank pretty poorly guarded because I use diplomacy to make sure that that neighbor hates someone else more than me.

[Giaur]

Archers are terrible mistake, so I always build axes/spears. In proportions 2:1.

Longbows is another story. I'd rather see longbows than cross/pikes. But pikes are very important too. So longbows and pikes in proportions 2:1. No crossbows - they are mistaken too.

Rifles and only rifles. My grenadiers tend not to have bonus vs rifles when defending, so I use grenades only as offense forces. It's good to have 1 or two cats when defending.

No machine guns - another mistake. No SAM - I am sorry to repeat that sentence again.

Mechs and gunships, also Drill 3-4 Modern Armor. I rarely let enemy come close enough to my cities at that age.

Generaly archery/gunpowder units are better to defend (except archers). However since chariots have bonus against axes, it's good to have 1 archer, 1 axe, 1 spear in every city.

There is active defense or passive defense. Active: ex. Pike leaves the city and kills Knight. Longbow has to wait and pray not to be pillaged. Both strategies have pros and cons. But it's a longer story ...

edit: elephants are even better than pikes. They have even better odds, when defending in open ground vs Knights.

[OTAKUjbski]

Originally Posted by Sjaramei

Don't think defense. Make big stack with lots of catas and lots of axes/swords and kill him before he can pillage you

Maybe things change at higher difficulties or in MP, but that's always been my philosophy.

I usually defend every city with cheap CG units.

Regardless of where they are, I give more important resource cities a small 'active' component capable of protecting those resources. These are usually War Elephants, Axemen, Grenadiers, etc.

Specialized cities and Wonder cities also get a Siege weapon or two in addition to the active component to help protect from assault.

Last but not least are reinforcements. At most two turns from any city is a mini 'stack killer' SoD comprised primarily of Siege weapons with Barrage to weaken and/or eliminate would-be city invaders.


Obviously, this consumes a LOT of production and depends on a lot of other factors as to just how plausible this is, but as long as I keep this goal in mind, I can usually invade to my heart's content without fear of getting blindsided by a late Vassal State Master ally.

[hvevo]

I don't really do defence, just offence

Anyway, in the early ages I use axes and spears. Basically I build the spears to defend the cities next to civs I'm not currently at war with, while I have my attacking stacks consisting of Shock promoted axes, Medic promoted Chariots and CR promoted swordmen taking care of the enemy. After city capture, I build one spear per each newly-captured city to defend.

When I get construction and if I have ivory, I replace the spears with War Elephants until I get pikemen. I usually upgrade my axes and swords to maces as soon as I have the money, and when I get Guilds I build a couple of knights to counter potential enemy crossbows. I never bother with archery units if I'm aiming for Domination/Conquest victory (well, I usually play on Prince or Monarch so probably longbowmen are very useful on higher difficulties).

I never bother with musketmen, but after I get Chemistry I use granadiers to defend and when I have rifles I upgrade my units to riflemen. After Assembly Line, I use infantry to attack and defend. If the game lasts until modern era (which usually doesn't happen), I use mechs, modern armors and gunships.

[DarkFyre99]

I usually garrison cities with archery-based units, two on the borders, one inside. However, I do keep one stack of 1 axe/mace, 1 spear/pike, 1 mounted, and two cats for every two border cities. They're usually stationed slightly towards the interior, equidistant from each of the two cities. They're close enough to respond in a turn or two to a large stack, while the garrison can usually survive a small stack.

[scooter]

It's becoming more and more obvious to me (the higher up in difficulty I go), that active defenders is far more important than passive defenders, because the AI loves to pillage. I'll stick a city garrison archer/longbow or two in my city, but I'd rather meet them at my cultural borders. Pillaging especially is painful on epic/marathon speeds because of how ridiculously long it takes workers (at least before serfdom) to rebuild the stuff.

[uberfish]

Axes and spears. I usually don't build archers unless I have trouble connecting metal because they are useless at killing pillagers. If the computer has access to both horses and metal it will send a mix of horse and melee troops so both types of defenders get to work at full effectiveness.

I don't like longbows, they are too passive. Crossbows are more useful in the field once you are counterattacking.

[TRJS]

Playing my first game as China at the moment and really fnid the Cho-Ko-Nu an excellent UU. Perfect for defense and very handy in offense.

One weakness is when mounted comes along so a trusty elephant is always nearby. One in every two cities or so.

[scooter]

Originally Posted by TRJS

Playing my first game as China at the moment and really fnid the Cho-Ko-Nu an excellent UU. Perfect for defense and very handy in offense.

I totally agree, I think the cho-ku-nu is easily in the top five most powerful UU's. It's part of the reason qin is my favorite leader in vanilla right now (financial-industrious-chokunus is a pretty good combo).

[druidravi]

Archers/longbows. Leave archer/spear pair in border cities. Spear stops the mobile units which attack before your own reinforcements can come, since its a suprise attack you fear. Where you know you are going to get attacked feel free to leave shock maces,crossbows,formation pikes,war elephants , knights for base strenth and most important barrage cats.

A BIG POINT in favour of archer is in time of trouble it can be upgraded to crossbow /longbow/rifle/infantry route with city garrison. A shock axe will look stupid if a knight suddenly decides to attack. Upgrade it to a mace?. Also remember archers are cheaper units.

Archer costs 25 shields , longbows 50 shields cost of upgrade 100g
axe costs 35 shields maces 70 shields cost of upgrade 130g .

I rest my case.

[Naismith]

I'm with most of the posters who worry more about pillaging than losing cities. I usually don't build many archers and longbowmen. Elephants are wonderful vs a horseman, but you won't always be able to build them, and they cost 60 hammers versus 35 for a spearman. Most times (not always), I would opt for two spearman vs. one war elephant.