Artillery and infantry on the attack

[jollyolly]

I noticed on these forums that people often discuss how useless an offensive land army is without tanks.

However, I have had to fight many a limited offensive war with only artillery and infantry.

The trick seems to be artillery numbers. If you stack twenty, thirty artillery units together your infantry can become a lethal attacking force.

Never underestimate the power of bombardment!

 

[budweiser]

Right, but cavalry cost 10 shields less than infantry and might retreat when losing. Infantry either win or die. Why not let cavalry attack and just use a few infantry for defense, or better still defend the cavalry and artillery with an infantry army.

 

[jollyolly]

All true.

You can use a smaller infantry force and taking a size 1 enemy city with infantry after its defenders have been reduced to 1hp by artillery is a piece of cake.

I dunno, maybe I just don't like cavalry!

 

[The Last Conformist]

The Cav-Inf-Arty combo is very powerful. I often make great conquests in the period between Replaceable Parts and Motorized Transportation.

Cavalry, in my mind, is the offensive unit of the game - it runs roughshood over three generations of defenders.

 

[Hunter]

Originally posted by jollyolly

Never underestimate the power of bombardment!

So very true.

I love cavalry but a slow moving group of armies consisting of a large group of artillary is devistating and can crush a cavalry attack. I like to move in a simple two to three wave asault. First is the attack wave with atleast two armys with atleast four artiallary and six infantry. Following this I have two armys for mop up of any fast moving units or for re-supply they have almost as many units as the first wave. Finaly a small group of cavalry or infantry for any straglers that get through. If the artialry firing ranges all conect it creates a deadly wall of destruction. Cavalry in the time of Replaceable parts is in my game only used to mop up wounded units.

But I still do love Cavalry in its own right however there is nothing like pounding my enemy into submision with overwhelming bombardment.

 

[Trev]

Infantry as attackers with artillery is fine for monarch or communist gov't, but it's slowness makes war impracticable for gov'ts that experience WW. That is why I use the artillery/cavalry combo for attacking, most times if you pay some attention to your culture production, you can decimate enemy cities with artillery placed within your territory, and then mop up with cavalry. As there is no time spent on enemy soil, and no losses of units, there is no accumulation of WW when capturing enemy cities.

As I always use democracy when available, this is important to me

 

[jollyolly]

Perhaps I should experiment with the cavalry-infantry-artillery combo.

I also never took into account the points about war weariness made in the last post when figting wars pre tank era.

One thing is for sure, massed artillery is so powerful its not a question of if an enemy city will fall, but when!

 

[downwithgravity]

i agree with Trev...the speed (or rather the lack thereof) makes artillery a difficult option when in a democracy, which i'm almost always in, unless i play a religious civ. generally in situations like that i prefer to use either massed cav/tanks, hopefully with air support.
otherwise, my wars are usually over very quickly with a nice ROP rape.

 

[zagnut]

You are right that Artillery is very important for reducing the size of a city and the hit points of its defenders. By the time you have Artillery the AI usually has Infantry. Also, its cities will get a defensive bonus for being larger than size 6 (50% bonus) or size 12 (100% bonus). That means that an enemy Infantry defending in a size 7 city has a defense of 15. Your Cavalry or Infantry (attack of 6) don't stand much of a chance in a frontal assault. If you don't want to lose a ton of offensive units in the attack, then you really have to use Artillery.

I will not use ROP Rape in the game. I think it is such a powerful exploit that it creates an unfair advantage for the human player. Also, it has no relationship to what would happen in the real world. Now I realize this is only a game and that the argument is if the game permits it then we should use it. But I disagree and think it is one advantage that should somehow be removed from the game.

 

[Sarevok]

I totally agree with this, almost everyone severly undersetimated infantry on te offensive.

 

[jollyolly]

The basic point I was trying to make is that if you are in a situation where a war is forced upon and you have few if any cavalry, then it is possible to mount a credible offensive with the inf-artillery combo. A stack of artillery is VERY powerful, no matter how slow they might be.

I suppose the counter point to this would be that any civ player worth his salt will have cavalry ready and waiting anyway.

 

[The Last Conformist]

Of course, if you need to scrap together an assault force immediately, and Inf and Arty are what you have available, they'll get the job done magnificiently as long as the enemy isn't having Mech Inf.

But given the choice, I always prefer Cav to Inf as attackers.

 

[T-hawk]

There's one and only one way to make optimum use of artillery. Use combat settlers to grab control of enemy territory as needed, so that your artillery can immediately move in and attack enemy cities on each and every turn. No waiting, minimal war weariness.

See this page (starting about halfway down) for a world-class example of how to do that.

http://www.dos486.com/civ3/epic27/page6.html

 

[jeremiahrounds]

I find a great time to break into a super enemy is right after Infantry and before Armor. The reason being is there is nothing out then that can really take out a stack of infantry. But heres the real reason that its a great time to go after your enemy: not even infantry can take out a stack of infantry. The offensive unit at the period is cavalry and infantry can repell entire hordes of cavalry. Infantry before armor is a great time to use your superior sense of strategy to dominate the computer or any opponent i would imagine. If you wait for armor and your opponent has armor it can be messy invading a continent by boat.

 

[scoutsout]

I am surprised there is not a "combined arms" article in the "War Academy". This is a term that I have seen often on this site, but seldom fully explained. The "combined arms" use of Infantry, Artillery, and Cavalry are classic. Though you can't replicate the real-world use of combined arms in the game ("screening" and reconnaisance use of Cavalry in the game are ineffective and wasteful) you CAN use the principle of combined arms effectively.

There are a couple of keys to warfighting in this era: First, technology favors the defender - Infantry are formidable in the defense. Second, movement generally favors the defender early in the war if he has a rail network built up - though this will work against him after you capture territory and can reinforce your position on the captured rail network.

Many are quick to note that Infantry and Cavalry are numerically equal in the attack - but the retreating ability of Cavalry makes them MUCH more powerful - particularly if you're fighting overseas. Each unit that survives to the next turn is one less unit occupying precious transport space - even if it has to rest a few turns in cities without barracks.

A common complaint about the tactic of bombing enemy cities with artillery is movement. While moving one square per turn in enemy held territory is slow, there are some ways to offset the downside of sluggish advances.

1) Take the high road. If you can take a path to the next enemy city that keeps you in the mountains, TAKE IT! Your infantry will enjoy a nice defensive bonus, and your cavalry won't be tempted to outrun your infantry. Your Combined Arms Task Force will arrive at the city's gates at full strength, ready to do some serious damage.

2) Consider opening up a second (or third) offensive axis of advance on the same front. If you have the resources (units and movement ability) to assemble additional CATFs of Art/Inf/Cav, and start a second axis of advance. If you have 3 CATFs operating in concert, one can be advancing on a city while a second is attacking a city, and a third is consolidating a city just taken.

A lot has been said here about the need to fight short wars when you are in Democracy or Republic, and these tactics do not lend themselves to short wars. It is important here to distinguish between a LONG war and a PROTRACTED war. If you are shelling a city with artillery and attacking with infantry and taking 3-4 turns to take a single city, you run the risk of a PROTRACTED war of attrition. If, OTOH, you are taking cities in 1-2 turns on each axis of advance, and KEEPING those cities after taking them, you will be fighting a much more decisive war. If part of your overseas army is consolidating in conquered territory, this should not contribute to war weariness in your homeland.

By maintaining the initiative, and giving the AI no rest... usually the war will reach a turning point where the enemy's army is sufficiently weakened that it makes more sense to send waves of cavalry into the remaining cities to finish the AI off in more of blitzing fashion. At this point the cavalry losses are of less consequence than ending the war - but the key is to END the war this way.

Some of my personal notes on this strategy:

Unit mix for a CATF - 2 or 3 parts cav to 1-1.5 parts Inf to 1-2 parts Arty. A transport load is the basic "part" for my recipie.

On logistics - I usually deploy my artillery in stacks with an equal (or greater) number of infantry. Sometimes I need to sacrifice an infantry or two to take out that last defender, and of course, you have to leave at least one behind after you take it...sometimes I'll also string unbroken lines of infantry across portions of the front, to keep his Cav off the rail networks outside my cultural boundaries (if left uncovered he could hit me deep, where my wounded units are resting).

On wartime production - Once I have my third CATF, I quit sending Artillery into the theater. (I do keep a stack at home, just in case). During the war I'm making CAV to replace losses, and infantry to replace the ones I've had to leave defending captured cities. It's just a pain to augment a stack in enemy territory, and I don't want to waste a turn keeping a stack still to reinforce it.

On pillaging and shelling roads - I don't do it. It hurts your diplomatic relations with the other AI civs, and is a distraction from the real military effort. My tactical goals are to destroy the enemy's army, and make his cities mine.

 

[jeremiahrounds]

ya but do you reload when you screw up and the enemy captures 15 artys at once? I dont. Lot of risk in 3 turns of empire production that cant defend itself.


personally i stick with the units that can attack and defend.

 

[CIVPhilzilla]

In the modern ages, when I get Radar Artillery nothing can stop me. I have like 30 of them, a Mech Infantry army on guard then usally have tanks or hopefully modern armors to move in for the kill.

 

[scoutsout]

Quoting jeremiahrounds:

"ya but do you reload when you screw up and the enemy captures 15 artys at once? "

That's shouldn't be an issue with a well-planned CATF. In order to capture 15 Artillery, my enemy will have to first take out 15 Infantry, plus 15-20 Cav - on high ground if available. (If the scale of the war is expected to be larger, the CATF is proportionately larger...)

"personally i stick with the units that can attack and defend."

The CATF is not my preferred method of fighting. I prefer to roll in with Knights/Cav/Tanks/Modern Armor, and blitz him so fast that I usually CAN'T bring defensive units in until the war is over, or at least decided. I'd much rather have my units start the turn in my territory, and finish the turn in my NEW territory. <g>

The whole point of CATF is that it is a useful tactic during that mid-industrial age, when the best defender (Infantry) has a tactical edge over the best attacker (Cav). I prefer to avoid fighting during this period, because it can be so costly. But sometimes it's unavoidable.

CATF uses Artillery to soften up the target, to give an edge back to the attacking Cavalry. The infantry are there to defend the Artillery and Cav en route to the target, to secure a city once taken, and OCCASIONALLY to finish off a LAST weakened defender that you'd rather use Cavalry to attack (but have attacked with all your Cav in that turn).

This approach also allows you to economize on your production and use of Cav, which will soon be obsolete. Artillery, OTOH, are still potentially useful until endgame...even if only to pummel an approaching transport from your shoreline...

 

[The Last Conformist]

Roughly equal #s of Arty and Inf? I normally have alot more Arty, since the AI rarely launched much in the way of counterattacks. May play different vs a human opponent, tho.

To keep up speed in this kind of combat, the chief things to do are i) exploit that range of two of Arty - blast the enemy city from two tiles away, and then attack with Cav across open ground - and ii) make sure your stack is powerful enough to take the city in one turn.

Cav/Arty/Inf stacks are, BTW, one of my favourite offensive forces. Simply running everything over with Tanks or Modern Armour isn't much fun.

 

[scoutsout]

Last Conformist - yours is a variation on the same theme - just as valid. You are correct- not ALL of those infantry are needed just to defend the stack. Here are some uses for the "additional" (NOT "extra") infantry that I include in my CATFs:

1) Some infantry must be left behind to defend captured cities.
2) Individual infantry can be used to form picket lines across railroads outside my new cultural borders, to keep the enemy from using these rails to hit me deep where my wounded units are resting.
3) A small stack of 2 or 3 infantry can be used to protect a stack of
captured workers that are busy on infrastructure projects to help in the war effort. A complete rail line to the front conserves movement points...
4) If I have just taken a city deep in enemy territory (maybe next to the enemy capitol) I can use additional infantry to form a perimeter around the captured city. In the event of a culture flip I only lose the one unit IN the city, he cannot reinforce that city, and my first counterattack is already there.