Warfare

[jjkrause84]

I'm sure you already know that, but each "unit" is actually supposed to represent a whole division with thousand soldiers each.

Obviously, yes, I'm aware of that but there is no scaling of armies. The same size force you need in the Middle Ages is the same size force you need in the Industrial age (4-6 melee and 3-4 artillery). You do not get the sense of 'army growth' in Civ 5, which is a shame.....it simply never feels like you are commanding armies of many millions in the modern era, as your army is scarcely larger than it was when it represented "a few thousand" in the classical or middle ages.

 

[SilverDash]

I believe that when Alexander the Great conquered cities, he lost a percentage of his attacking units but he then took the survivors from that city and put those in his army. The more he conquered the bigger his army got to the point that when he conquered a city the last units of his army where still leaving the previous city . They also gain more happiness by taking over a city afaik instead of losing it...

Often those armies where also fed by razing and paid by looting/raping. In this game there is no real way of supporting large early armies and siege units get destroyed really fast (until you get 3-range siege/units).

I found out that I can keep my siege units alive in melee range vs cities by having another strong unit with 1 hp less than the most damaged siege and the AI will target that unit instead.

 

[pilot00]

Well to be honest civs were not wargames. They included war as a facet but it was and is that, a facet not the core of the game.

 

[mike3640]

The only thing i hate about warfare in this game is that AI is stupid,stupid,stupid,stupid.It just don't understand logic of the waging warfare in this game (so probably you found opponent that fits you),but for me its like trying to play chess with 8 year's old child. Btw why do you play strategy game that involves warfare if you are beyond helpless when it comes to it ?

No need to be an ass. If you would learn to read I said I have beaten the AI plenty in the past but I don't understand/like the mechanics of the ranged units in the game. You must have some social issues if you need to come here to insult people. Can a mod close this thread or something before more unnecessary posts occur?

Moderator Action: Please do not answer trolls. Report the post and let the staff handle it. Feeding trolls only makes things worse. This is inappropriate.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Gucumatz]

I'm aware of the system mechanics. I played GnKs quite a bit. It's this last map i played that I realized how limited you are at times. I'm a fairly adept civ player at this point. I just think that siege weapons are so limited by the map terrain that last game I played was ridiculously not fun. I see no reason why my own unit should prevent my cannon from firing. 2 tiles away. This would be less of an issue if perfect world 3 and continents maps didn't put so much snaky terrain. At the end of the day this is more of whiny complaint at my dislike of civ 5 combat than a plea for assistance although stride provides nice fundamentals

Say what???

Having a unit in front of your cannon doesn't prevent it from firing. Not sure you know what you are talking about, post screenshots next time so people can tell you what you are doing wrong .

Civ 5 combat is one of the best imo, particularly in Multiplayer [Although I'd make artillery have less range, bombers a bit more limited etc. to balance a bit more]. Civ 5 MP is more tactical IE than StarCraft. The AI is so easssy to kill with current rules, I am surprised the OP is having trouble fighting if he only plays singleplayer.

 

[Timothy001]

In my last game as Shaka, Took out Ramses, with help from Catherine. Then she asked for help with al-Rashid, and once he was gone...
Took her out for the Conquest Victory. Built 4 Imps, 4 Catapults, and had them all get Mountain training (it was 4 tiles from my start). For whatever strange reason, played a 4 player Continent game, and put us all on the same continent, left the other for City-States.

 

[NihilVerum]

Am I the only one who hates warfare in this game? I just go so frustrated I'm stepping away from Civ 5 for awhile. Why is it that my cannons can't hit anything that isn't directly in front of them? Where is the strategy if I can't protect my cannons with musketmen? ugh moving away from this game for a bit and plan on coming back for a culture game or something. Warfare is just too stagnant for me. How do you approach an opponents city?

I'm glad I'm not alone. I generally understand the basic tricks of warfare in Civ5 but there's always something that annoys me to no end about it. Either I'm successful and pushing my enemy's sh*t in (leading to unhappiness, gold and science issues) or the damn AI keeps pooping out unit after unit after unit and the entire war becomes a stalemate for 1000 years.

 

[Senteliks]

Moderator Action: Post deleted, please do not troll these forums.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[pezit]

So far, my only complaint about war is that I find unwalled cities a bit too difficult to take. Now that gold is more scarce and there are more build options and strategies competing for our interests in the early game, deciding on going to war early on is a much riskier decision and often puts you in debt if you want to build a nice-sized army. Upkeep costs can be brutal and it takes production to build those units. War also often requires considerable planning and timing whereas some of the other opening strategies don't.

In one of my recent games I was playing as Montezuma. I poured all my early turns into spamming jaguar warriors to take advantage of Honor's bonuses. Anyway, Ethiopia plopped a city down real close to my capital in the middle of jungle/forest. He had a warrior stationed in the city as well that he used to escort the settler with. I know I didn't have any archers but I figured the city had 8 health and I had 4 jaguar warriors. Needless to say I couldn't take the city. My whole game up to that point revolved around spamming military units and I cant take a lone, completely undeveloped, early-game city in the middle of the jungle with 4 units that are designed to fight in jungle??? I just quit and started another game.

I'd be more inclined to go to war in the future if it wasn't such an uphill battle compared to just building a granary and popping out some shrines or trade routes.

A better use of jaguars would be to start a war but ignore the cities and get a lot of culture from their units, that and kill lots of barbarians.

 

[pilot00]

Say what???

Having a unit in front of your cannon doesn't prevent it from firing. Not sure you know what you are talking about, post screenshots next time so people can tell you what you are doing wrong .

Civ 5 combat is one of the best imo, particularly in Multiplayer [Although I'd make artillery have less range, bombers a bit more limited etc. to balance a bit more]. Civ 5 MP is more tactical IE than StarCraft. The AI is so easssy to kill with current rules, I am surprised the OP is having trouble fighting if he only plays singleplayer.

Sorry to say that you are drawing comparisons of melons to oranges there. And you are a bit wrong my friend.

 

[pilot00]

I believe that when Alexander the Great conquered cities, he lost a percentage of his attacking units but he then took the survivors from that city and put those in his army. The more he conquered the bigger his army got to the point that when he conquered a city the last units of his army where still leaving the previous city . They also gain more happiness by taking over a city afaik instead of losing it...

Often those armies where also fed by razing and paid by looting/raping. In this game there is no real way of supporting large early armies and siege units get destroyed really fast (until you get 3-range siege/units).

I found out that I can keep my siege units alive in melee range vs cities by having another strong unit with 1 hp less than the most damaged siege and the AI will target that unit instead.

I am sorry but everything you say here is completely inaccurate as far as history is concerned

And as far as the AI is concerned that behavior has been reduced/eliminated on one of the patches.