Artillery

[smallfish]

Why do people complain about the "overpowered-ness" of modern military units?

What, are they throwing crossbowmen and pikes at Alexander's 70-def Sparta and getting hammered by unseen artillery pieces in turn? Then that isn't the problem of unit power, that means they need to tech up to parity or better.

Artillery is fine as it is. Nerfing it would reduce the purpose of industrial/modern era, which is to demonstrate that modern wars are hellishly expensive.

 

[FeiLing]

the problem isn't that ancient units are useless against artillery, but modern units too.

at the time one can have artillery, the equivalent unit to combat them is infantry/riflemen and cavalry. These units might not even kill an artillery in one attack. So when you attack into artillery you'll lose 10 equally expensive units to kill 1 or 2 units. That not the defenders advantage. That is imba.
They either need to remove free indirect fire and/or range3 promotion or let them keep those two but make them unable to gain logistics to make them balanced.

 

[tetley]

Artillery are powerful, but I'm okay with it. Cavalry eat artillery for lunch, and they are in fact one tech down (on par with cannon). Even Knights do a number on them. Tanks go without saying.

 

[The_Quasar]

Artillery are powerful, but I'm okay with it. Cavalry eat artillery for lunch, and they are in fact one tech down (on par with cannon). Even Knights do a number on them. Tanks go without saying.

This is correct... sometimes you have to think about killing Artillery, but that is a part of the game (and is similar to a RL situation too). To say Artillery is overpowered without Cavalry or Knights is crazy, imho, as the most important job of Cavalry is against Artillery! It's like saying Tanks are overpowered without using Anti-tank Guns and/or Bombers. Or Bombers are overpowered without Anti-Aircraft Guns or SAMs. Each one can be very powerful, but there are counters in the game, use them, as they are used in realtime!

Any can be somewhat overpowered in the game, but that's not the player's fault, neither is it the fault of the unit, it's the AI's inability to use the counters properly, is the real problem!

 

[joncnunn]

Also, I note that some generals have said, "God fights on the side on those with the largest artillery"

So its realistic when in the hands of a human. (AI though often sucks on placement)

 

[The_Quasar]

I believe this is realistic, look at the charges of the Heavy and Light (Cavalry) Brigades in the Crimea War. Attacking Artillery with Cavalry is costly, but it can be done, just as in the game. imho, they have got it quite realistic.

The only REALLY OP units in the game are the Atom Bomb and Nuclear Missile, as they have no counters available at all.

Another unit not yet talked about, that is very effective against Artillery is the Lancer... with it's movement, it can almost come from nowhere to defeat an Artillery unit.

 

[PhilBowles]

I believe this is realistic, look at the charges of the Heavy and Light (Cavalry) Brigades in the Crimea War. Attacking Artillery with Cavalry is costly, but it can be done, just as in the game. imho, they have got it quite realistic.

I've taken to referencing the Charge of the Light Brigade when, as sometimes happens, my cavalry chase down one unit only to have a bunch of artillery revealed behind them...

Sure, if you have a grand total of one Cavalry and you attack those 3-5 Artillery, you've had it. But it's a Civ V truism that melee units are more expendable than ranged units - if you lose one Cavalry to take out 2 or 3 Artillery with your follow-up attacks, you have by far the better deal. And a Rifleman with the cover promotions can survive two or three artillery attacks in a turn.

The only REALLY OP units in the game are the Atom Bomb and Nuclear Missile, as they have no counters available at all.

Name a real-world counter to either. The Strategic Defence Initiative was shelved, and missile defence systems remain extremely inaccurate. The counter to nukes is not going to war...

 

[TheHanzou]

Nukes arent even that overpowered, they are just to cheap.

If you play 1vs1 or some other scenario with a really small map, most of the time you will only have between 2 and 4 cities. In that scenario the first one with nukes wins right there.

But since nukes only have a range of 8/12 it takes a long time until your big cities can be hit in normal games. the only problem with nukes is that you will get hit by 1-4 nukes every 6 Turns. If they were a lot more costly (like they should be), like at least double compared to conventional units, theyd not even be that bad.

In multiplayer games it is very common for one side to get artillery and then stalling the game until nukes. Its a good indicator for the defensive overpoweredness of artillery when every game where artillery is involved ends with nukes.

Artillery on the other hand is just way to strong as is, its a simple fact of getting range 3 and indirect fire all in one go. Its by far the strongest and most significant upgrade in the whole game, its just too strong.

Artillery should have a range of 2 with indirect fire and a later version range 3. There is no reason at all to make it that strong. Not in in game terms and not when compared to real life performance either.

Of course whoever came up with a tech tree where the next best unit upgrade after Artillery is Nukes should be shot, noone goes for weak fighters when its just 1 or 2 tech more for instawin nukes. Nukes should have been on the other side of the tech spectrum, in the science branch of the tree. Not the military tree.

Considering that they are going to implement a WW I era theres enough room for such a change.

 

[bhavv]

Nothing wrong with artillery, cities should not be easy to capture and they can only garrison a single unit.

Best way to deal with artillery is to attack with more artillery.

 

[Pisskop]

Gift a friendly city-state a fair amount of artillery and watch how not to use them...

 

[bhavv]

The only reason anything in Civ V is overpowered is because the AI is pure crap.

If the AI could correctly handle artilery / longbows, and each civilizations UAs (Babylon in particular), the game would be a lot more challenging.

You can't put the blame of artilery feeling OP when it it due to the AI simply being terrible.

 

[NotSure]

The only reason anything in Civ V is overpowered is because the AI is pure crap.

If the AI could correctly handle artilery / longbows, and each civilizations UAs (Babylon in particular), the game would be a lot more challenging.

You can't put the blame of artilery feeling OP when it it due to the AI simply being terrible.

Yup... One of the first games I played on a harder difficulty I had Genghis next to me. He got a bunch of Keshiks real quick. Just as I was about to rage quit and fire up another game, I discovered the AI doesn't move after firing... sweet

 

[bhavv]

I've played wonder whoring games with both Greece and Japan as my neighbors, and also with monty.

They are still rushing me with warriors / jaguars / hoplites when I have crossbows and / or hwachas for defence.

Recently I had Elizabeth as a neighbor who attacked me with a mass army of pikes and longbows (my difficulty is increased to emperor now, so they have better units).

Something like 4 pikemen and 8 longbows were decimated by my mere two hwachas and city bombard.

The dumb AI pulls longbows and artillery within a 1-2 hex range of my city, one hwacha garissoned inside, the other one tile behind on a hill. Why is the AI so ********?

 

[The_Quasar]

Nukes arent even that overpowered, they are just to cheap.

The main reason they are OP is BECAUSE they are far too cheap. Any unit that has no counter should be AT LEAST 3 times the cost that they are... which would reflect on realtime far more accurately.

The only reason anything in Civ V is overpowered is because the AI is pure crap.

The dumb AI pulls longbows and artillery within a 1-2 hex range of my city, one hwacha garissoned inside, the other one tile behind on a hill. Why is the AI so ********?

There are many reasons for this... the main ones being that the the persons who told the coders what to do had (I suspect) 1) no military experience 2) far too little experience in playing the game (any Civ game) and 3) there was far too little time to test the game before it came out due to unrealistic deadlines. There are other reasons, too, but I think these make quite a lot of the problem.

Another ludicrous problem is that the AI has no idea of what a defence is, they will always try to attack with a defensive unit, for example, an Anti-Aircraft Gun or SAM. This just makes using aircraft all the more powerful. Usually (these days) they build enough, but they just throw them away by doing something stupid like attacking a city with them.

The same thing happens when, for example, an Artillery is all too easily lured out of a city (for example by a Worker) where it should have stayed.

Maybe there should be some kind of defensive flag for certain AI units?

 

[smallfish]

Another ludicrous problem is that the AI has no idea of what a defence is, they will always try to attack with a defensive unit, for example, an Anti-Aircraft Gun or SAM. This just makes using aircraft all the more powerful. Usually (these days) they build enough, but they just throw them away by doing something stupid like attacking a city with them.

AA/SAMs are actually pretty good infantry sweepers. I've had my share of infantries getting slaughtered in droves by them. More importantly, supported by artillery and aircrafts, they can take cities.

 

[The_Quasar]

AA/SAMs are actually pretty good infantry sweepers. I've had my share of infantries getting slaughtered in droves by them. More importantly, supported by artillery and aircrafts, they can take cities.

There are better ones at the same cost, but usually it makes them too easy to take out and then your Bombers have the field to themselves. This makes things too easy.

 

[smallfish]

There are better ones at the same cost, but usually it makes them too easy to take out and then your Bombers have the field to themselves. This makes things too easy.

I'll grant you that the AI could certainly learn to use formations, but at the same time, I do not agree that AA/SAMs are "defensive" units. Their purpose is defensive, but with their ability to melee other land units and cities, that purpose can be easily tweaked into an offensive nature.

 

[The_Quasar]

I'll grant you that the AI could certainly learn to use formations, but at the same time, I do not agree that AA/SAMs are "defensive" units. Their purpose is defensive, but with their ability to melee other land units and cities, that purpose can be easily tweaked into an offensive nature.

Their purpose is defensive, as you say, yes... just as a Tank is an offensive unit, but it can still be used in defense.

If you have a Tank and a SAM, it would always be best to use the Tank for offense and the SAM for defense, rather than the other way around.

My point is that the AI does not realise this, and will tend to use units which are better as defensive units, as offensive units. Often throwing away a useful unit.

 

[Pisskop]

I wouldn't care about defensive units for offense if they threw half of creation at me and succeeded... when a single archer(or artillery) can cripple an incoming army. add a GG and support from calvery and the probable wonder or wall defenses you have, as well as river, the ridiculous city health regen, and a lack of forest/hills and an occ city just became CultureBomb, the impregnable fortress.

On a side note, I never found a true use for the black citidel... pos and a waste of a GG in all but the most extrenuating circumstances.

 

[Gucumatz]

The only reason anything in Civ V is overpowered is because the AI is pure crap.

If the AI could correctly handle artilery / longbows, and each civilizations UAs (Babylon in particular), the game would be a lot more challenging.

You can't put the blame of artilery feeling OP when it it due to the AI simply being terrible.

Not true. They are very good in Multiplayer too. But I wouldn't say gamebreaking because human intelligence can counter them still.

Nukes are the only thing truly broken when it comes to units. In multiplayer the first person to get a nuke wins the game.