Artillery is too powerful

[ThERat]

@Microbe, I agree with your fears. You have far more experience than me, but we both know that often in Civ3 the game changed entirely in favor of the human player once artillery came into play. AI was simply not smart enough to know how to use it.
Now, arty seems even more powerful, knowing the 'smart' AI behaviour, I fear they would try and avoid a SOD by spreading out units. And imagine your land now covered by units all over, that will annoy the heck out of us. (Of course AI behaviour depeds on programming, so I am guessing here).

@Dida
Nobody asked you to join Civ4 discussions before the game is out. All we discuss here is about assumptions and guessing based on info released by FIRAXIS (and not us, by the way). If you don't like it, you don't need to join the discussion, thanks.

 

[microbe]

In Civ4, though, we know that bombardment units attack and defend like normal units, and we also know that whilst they are good against infantry, they are at a disadvantage against Cavalry.

Hmm, somehow I didn't know about this (could you point me to the source?). If bombardment units could be lost when they attack, what would be the difference between a bombardment unit and a non-bombardment unit? Just the CD ability?

 

[ThERat]

In Civ4, though, we know that bombardment units attack and defend like normal units, and we also know that whilst they are good against infantry, they are at a disadvantage against Cavalry.

are you sure? I think what they meant was, that they also can be attacked and destroyed unlike Civ3 where they would be captured. Kind of like dromons in Civ3 I guess, where they have the ability to just bomb or attack. And who'd be that silly to use arty as top defender? So, during attack a better defender in the stack would take over. I simply don't think artillery can be destroyed during bombardment, that would be completely unrelalistic or since when do cannons etc. inflict damage on themselves during arty attack?

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

The point is we simply don't know all the facts about how arty will work-so it is simply too early to judge them as too weak or too powerful. The big issue for me is-will the AI make proper use of them. If not, then you are right, civ4 arty will be too powerful, just as they were in Civ2 and Civ3. If the AI does understand their value, though-then I think arty will finally be a fantastic part of game strategy.

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

 

[mudblood]

First off, of course we should be able to discuss this part of Civ IV before it comes out, isn't that the point of this forum?

Anyway, I like the new rules for artillery. I don't know if Firaxis will get the AI right, but if they get the multiplayer going well, will I be playing as many solo games? But I like that these tweaks mean big differences in the way I will play the game. Now I will have to engage new strategies to win games. If chokepoints become an issue, then I have to find new strategies around chokepoints -- such as seapower or diplomatic agreements. I actually hope that when Civ IV comes out, I will have to rethink all the strategies I used with Civ III.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

I agree that we should be able to discuss these sorts of things here in the forum, I just get a bit concerned when people criticise a system based on one assumption piled on a dozen others ! I also agree that changes to the game which makes me rethink my 'winning' strategies from other games is good-as it was what I had to do in Civ3.

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

 

[mikehunt]

sure civ3 arty can attack without risking death, but you still need another unit to guard it, and a 3rd unit to actually go kill the enemy unit
I'd rather simply build 3 attack, or 1 defense and 2 attack units, for every arty, def, att combo.
if I really need to bombard units I'll build some bombers which can "advance" much faster due to their range. move the bombers up to 2 or 3 rows of cities back from the front, bombard, and then move them a city forward each time you take more ground. Bombers can react to the enemy coming from different directions much easier than the 1 movement arty units

 

[ThERat]

@mikehunt
you have not faced an enemy far superior with ToW in pop-15 cities with AA. Try and attack with bombers and tanks and you will soon figure out that arty isn't that useless as you might think.

 

[bkwrm79]

It seems to me that artillery in Civ IV will function much like that in SMAC. I hope that this extends to artillery duels.

In SMAC, artillery had a chance to damage every unit in a square. BUT, if there was an artillery unit there, instead the artillery units fought.

It made for an effective and realistic defence against artillery. But without such defense, artillery could weaken a whole stack, forcing some strategic dispersion of forces.

 

[nullspace]

sure civ3 arty can attack without risking death, but you still need another unit to guard it, and a 3rd unit to actually go kill the enemy unit
I'd rather simply build 3 attack, or 1 defense and 2 attack units, for every arty, def, att combo.

That's true, bombard units aren't needed in situations where you don't mind losing units. However, the only drawback of artillery that you've pointed out is an economic one: building the unstoppable artillery stack of doom takes more production and unit support than the attacker/defender stack. Once you've got the artillery stack, there isn't much that can harm you in combat. There needs to be a military counter to artillery.

if I really need to bombard units I'll build some bombers which can "advance" much faster due to their range. move the bombers up to 2 or 3 rows of cities back from the front, bombard, and then move them a city forward each time you take more ground. Bombers can react to the enemy coming from different directions much easier than the 1 movement arty units

Now, bombers are a good example of a powerful unit that has good counters. Mobile ground AA, fighters on air superiority, and SAM city improvements all effectively destroy bombers in different situations. These units can easily stop a bomber offensive (though getting the AI to build them and use them is a totally separate problem).

It sounds like Civ 4 has a good set of counters for its infantry, archers, and cavalry, so I hope that carries over to artillery as well.

 

[Dark Russell]

This colateral damage seems interesting. I wonder if the chance to damage additional units goes up with the number of units occupying the same square. For instance, if there were two defenders, only one would be hit, but if there were 10 units, one would be the primary target with maybe three or four others being colateral targets.

And as far as arty being too powerful, I modded mine down to be less effective so physical combat would be inevitable. However, stacks of arty would still be useful to lightly soften up defenders.

 

[Himalia]

Theres certainly alot of difference of opinion on the artillery front. I still think its underpowered while as just said in the last post it got moded down because it was to powerful. Would be intresting to see a poll on this to see how the feelings are spread on it.

 

[Nobody]

Nobody asked you to join Civ4 discussions before the game is out.

While i do understand that i hold i high postition here in the Civilization society, and alot of people respect and admire me, i wouldn't think for a moment that i personally have enough weight around these parts to give and take permission to take part in the discussions.

 

[Evertonian]

The apparent inability of the AI to use artillery effectively in Civ 3 was a deliberate decision by the programmers. The problem with the AI having a large stack of artillery is that it automatically becomes a target for the human player, who in a war would typically (and optimally) devote substantial resources towards capturing those units. As we know a full strength army deters the AI from attacking us, so if we use it to escort our artillery then we know they won't be captured. Faced with the reverse situation though, the human player would gladly sacrifice many units to capture a large stack of artillery.

In order to meet the universal desire for better AI use of artillery, either the AI must make capturing artillery as much of a priority as a human player would or the AI must be programmed to devote substantial defensive resources to escort artillery (far more than in Civ 3 - and far more than the human player typically would).

 

[CyberChrist]

@Nobody:

 

[Sirian]

In Civ4, though, we know that bombardment units attack and defend like normal units...

Hmm. That might be interesting.

The Civ3 AI was always inept with artillery. After some urging, Soren added an AI routine for offensive artillery use, but it was too much akin to the standard AI offense/defense pairing and never, in my experience, did anything strategically significant against me.

One would hope that Civ4 AI can actually USE artillery on this go-'round. This may be one instance where simpler is better.


- Sirian

 

[ThERat]

While i do understand that i hold i high postition here in the Civilization society, and alot of people respect and admire me, i wouldn't think for a moment that i personally have enough weight around these parts to give and take permission to take part in the discussions.

Nobody, of course I have no right to tell anyone whether they have the right or not, anyone can do whatever they like to do, live and let live, but you have to read the initial post that made me write it

and we have losers here whinning that Arti are too powerful. Have you even seen a single civ4 arties yet? So stay quiet and wait peacefully to see what Firaxis has in store for us. Stop whinning about things you know next to nothing about.

thought that was not a nice thing to say...considering the original post was from Microbe...not a little fly in this community

 

[Dida]

Folks, I never said we cannot discuss features in civ4 before it comes out. All I was saying is 'stop the whinning'.
Jesus, not even a beta was released to the public, let alone the game itself, and we already have people criticizing some parts of the game, like 'arties being too powerful' or whatever.
This is so stupid, so give it up, it only shows how meaningless and lacking your life really is. Don't you have other things to do aside from worrying and speculating about some features in a game?
Worrying and speculating will not change anything now, as the game is already in final testing phase. So just sit tight and have your money ready when it comes out. Then, you and critisize or praise the game all you want, because that will be customer review, which is very constructive.

 

[Himalia]

Im just going to point out the obvioues because i feel as if some people forget that artillery pieces in Civ 3 do have one major drawback. Yes they never take damage when they attack and also cant take damage. However if they get attacked they lose automatically if not accompanied by any other troops. Im really not so sure about using them as a major piece in a SOD. Yes have a few in your cities thats pretty sound. The thing is i think they had an idea with artillery and didt get it spot on. But lets just keep in mind if a tactic does not work for you or suit your style of play it does not mean that the tactic is automatically correct or incorrect. Im no fan of artillery but many people are so there must be something it. Sam goes with many aspects of the game take governments im a Democracey man fullstop. But most prefer The Republic its seems, neither of us are correct it just means my generic style of play is not as suited to that government. I hopeing that artillery will be more powerful in Civ IV but at the same time should also use more standard rules for combat. Surely it can defend itself. As for not taking damage when it attacks. That makes sence afterall it is a bombardment. As a bomber does not take damage as it drops bombs, well not unless something returns fire.

 

[Dida]

I have seen the video and read the previews. You'd better educate yourself more. If you have any concrete contribution to the discussion, welcome, otherwise stay quiet.

Looks like you don't like it when people point out that you are wasting your time. Get off your lazy ass, stop daydreaming about features in a future game, and start doing some work, start contributing to society, would you?

Moderator Action: I've been watching what has been going on here and I let it go for a while hoping everything would go back to normal. Obviously I was wrong about that.
I think it is time for the discussion between you two to stop.
-Civrules
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889