How to win this war?

tokyochojin

Chieftain
Joined
May 19, 2009
Messages
59
Hello guys,

I am a bit of a newbie to Civilization V and am currently stuck in a war against Siam. I was going for a cultural victory but was attacked by neighbour the Vikings and conquerd them in retaliation. Since then, my two wonder rivals Egypt & Siam decided to declare war on me.

How do you think I should proceed with this war and do I have a chance or should i pull out to build more units. Also, any other tips on how to improve my game would be greatly appreciated.
 

Attachments

  • Kamehameha.Civ5Save
    741.5 KB · Views: 81
Just to note ... you never want to fully conquor a rival civ. It just seems to tick everyone else off at you. A few times, I've bombed a city down to nothing, and let a city-state unit take the city.

If you're going for a cultural victory, you don't want to be overly aggressive anyway. You DON'T want to have multiple cities, especially puppet/annexed cities. You will usually want to have no more than 3 cities. Any more and you're going to be taking a happiness/culture hit. If people get into a war with you, you will just want to fight a defensive battle, and just keep them off of you until you wipe out their forces and they are looking for a peace treaty.

As for the battles themselves. I always try to get creative with the archers/crossbowmen.I place them behind my city with maybe a front-line unit or two in front ... preferably on a hill or forest. With three archers behind and a city-bombardment, you should be able to wipe out at LEAST one unit per turn. Don't attack with your front line units though. Put them on Fortify, and hold your ground. Let the archers do all the work, while your front-line unit absorb all the damage with the terrain/fortify modifier advantages. You can also try and rotate out damaged units to let them repair. After awhile, you should be getting quite a few promotions, and have a pretty formidable defense force.
 
Excl's advice is good generically, but doesn't address your current position.

I would advise withdrawing from your current position and building up more force before trying again.. Siam has more troops than you do, and they are probably stronger. (He has at least one cannon and some of his UU elephants; you have a trebuchet and muskets.) He also has plenty of defensive hills, and you are trying to make an amphibious assault against them. You are unlikely to succeed.

If you do plan to make another assault later, I would suggest moving around to the west where you can land some troops unopposed. Bring plenty of siege equipment, and pikes if you can find them to hold off the elephant charges.
 
If you're going for a cultural victory, you don't want to be overly aggressive anyway. You DON'T want to have multiple cities, especially puppet/annexed cities. You will usually want to have no more than 3 cities. Any more and you're going to be taking a happiness/culture hit.

With all due respect, I have to disagree with the "absolutely no puppet cities" in a cultural victory, because puppeted cities don't increase the amount of culture required to gain another policy...only cities under your direct control do that.

I will admit, though, that I usually try for domination or diplomatic victories, because those are usually quicker to achieve than cultural. I love getting a policy every ten turns or less due to the culture gained at no requirement expense from my puppets, but I use those policies for more happiness, not for cultural growth.
 
With all due respect, I have to disagree with the "absolutely no puppet cities" in a cultural victory, because puppeted cities don't increase the amount of culture required to gain another policy...only cities under your direct control do that.

I will admit, though, that I usually try for domination or diplomatic victories, because those are usually quicker to achieve than cultural. I love getting a policy every ten turns or less due to the culture gained at no requirement expense from my puppets, but I use those policies for more happiness, not for cultural growth.

I wouldn't say "absolutely no puppets" ... as they have their uses, especially for strategic resources. But I would say you don't want a LOT of them ... and I was talking more about the annex'ed cities, as those the ones that will really drag you down.

The reason for reduced numbers of puppets is to keep the happiness up. One of the Piety policies converts excess happiness to culture. That can provide a pretty big boost to your culture per turn.
 
The reason for reduced numbers of puppets is to keep the happiness up. One of the Piety policies converts excess happiness to culture. That can provide a pretty big boost to your culture per turn.

Meh. I've rarely gotten more than 20-30 culture from that policy in a Prince difficulty or higher game, and getting 40-50 excess happiness in and of itself is a bit difficult to me. Maybe 30-40 if the Sistine Chapel affects that type of culture. I suppose one might be able to pull off 40-50 excess happiness with a wide empire under their control, but that presents far more issues to an attempt at cultural victory than the sacrifice in culture from happiness that one encounters with puppeted cities.

It takes a lot for me to consider something to be a "pretty big boost" to culture. A ceiling of a flat 40 culture from excess happiness per turn that is pretty difficult to maintain without sacrificing other things is not one of them. Things like an unacceptable cultural requirement for new policies that a wide empire would entail, for instance.

Even assuming a best case flat 40 culture from excess happiness per turn, 40 cpt is a drop in the bucket for a cultural victory even with a small amount of controllable cities. The amount of culture that puppet cities generate is significantly more than 40 a turn in my opinion, especially when getting close to finishing the fourth and fifth cultural families.

I suppose it's possible to get that much excess happiness with a narrow tall empire, but I still haven't come close to the policy progress per turn of a wide puppeted empire. :: shrugs ::
 
Mandate From heaven is most powerful early. If you take it and abuse th hell out of it, you got your picks worth. There is no reason to try and maximize it the whole game. That being said, I see no reason to effectively turn it off.

I haven't had a chance to look at the save game, but I always recommend limited war. If you can put your enemy a whole tier weaker than you, you have accomplished something. Try to analyze teh battlefield and select a single city, that if your opponent lost it and you gained it, you would go up substantially in power and he would drop. Keep in mind he would still be a power, just one you would out tech, out produce, etc. Building nothing but troops to try and conquer a whole civ, can really put you behind overall.

As an example, I took 1 city from the French in my last game initially (early medieval). It was easily assaulted, put the focus on that city going forward (it acted as a citidel defending the other cities, so instead of defending 2 cities I was defending 1, it gave me ivory which I did not have and could not trade for, it also had two other luxuries and 4 iron which I sold off. It still had substantial population left afterwards to be productive (I annexed it). It had the effect of making the french overproduce units as they now had to defend 3 cities instead of one. The tiles had largely been worked, it had granary and aquaduct, two good improvements to have in a conquered city. I also got silver and money as part of a peace deal. By taking this one city I cut out the heart of the french empire and took them from being the continents leading power to being a second tier power. There really wasn't a good reason to take them out of the game yet, and doing so would only open up a huge front with Siam. Later on I launched a massive campiagn and took 3 French cities with my minutemen and cannons, leaving them with 7-8 small cities cut in half effectively taking them out of the game for good. If I researched oil and found out they only had one source, I might take that city later as well and make sure I had the city state oil market cornered.

Good wars can be small wars. Also consider wars of attrition. If I stop my opponents assault and destroy many of his units and gain experience and generate a great general while loosing few of my own, it was a good war.

I would encourage the OP to analyse his opponents forces and the battlefield and come up with a war plan that cuts the heart out of his opponent and reduces him to a second tier power. No reason to try to conquer everything this early.
 
Thank you for your feedback guys. Like I said, I'm a newbie and would appreciate any comments on my overall game and what you would suggest I could have done better.

I think I will take KRC's advice and withdraw (for now). The problem is that Siam is only just behind me and although I think I can win I need to weaken him to make sure I do. The West shore would, in retrospective have been a better starting point but I just rushed into the counter after his aggression. His cannon's and elephants are very strong mind.

I think the only plus I have is his city not being on the shore so I can spam him with ships?
 
Mandate From heaven is most powerful early. If you take it and abuse th hell out of it, you got your picks worth. There is no reason to try and maximize it the whole game. That being said, I see no reason to effectively turn it off.

Perhaps so. I usually start with Ancient, so it takes me a little time to research enough to unlock Piety, more time than I'm comfortable with beelining to Mandate.

The thing I dislike most about Mandate is that it really doesn't scale too well. Maybe if the amount of culture I got for excess Happiness increases depending on what Research era I was in...
 
Wow. Invading is definitely not in your favor. Given that your only siege to counter that Cannon is an embarked Trebuchet? Yeah, not good.

I'd pull back to your own territory and pick them off if and when they try and an amphibious assault onto your territory.
 
Top Bottom