Carrier Battle groups

[Zoke0]

I find that these babies are very helpful. I use four destroyers, Four battle ships four subs and a Carrier with 2 Fighters and 2 Bombers. When I get Nuke Subs and tact. Nukes, use two per group and when I get Cruisers I use two per group.This is a very effective formation (I think). This is what it looks like, ok see your ten-key number part of your keyboard on the left side of your keyboard (it is formatted like a calculator). Imagine the 5 is the carrier, 4,8,6 and 2 are destroyers and 1,3,7 and 9 are Battleships. Then the rest of the group are scattered to intercept enemys. Sometimes I bring 2 or so transports to the same square as the Carrier. This is very affective, but takes many turns to build.

If anyone knows of a faster and/or more effective groups please tell me!!!!! Thanks

 

[Zoke0]

It was the right side no the left!!!!

 

[Sentinali]

Its still won't help your invasion. Numbers count, you are probably just wasting resources on all the destroyers. When the enemy has 200 riflemen and you land 32 mech infantry, Your MIs still die (it happened!)

 

[LaRo]

Originally posted by Zoke0
This is what it looks like, ok see your ten-key number part of your keyboard on the left side of your keyboard (it is formatted like a calculator). Imagine the 5 is the carrier, 4,8,6 and 2 are destroyers and 1,3,7 and 9 are Battleships. Then the rest of the group are scattered to intercept enemys.

Is it not more safe to put all units of the battle group on the same tile?

If someone attack you, you defend better and have less chance of losing an unit.

Do you agree?

 

[Beowolf]

Maybe he used to play Civ II, when stacking was dangerous.

 

[LaRo]

Yeah, so much units destroyed by one battleship!

Civ3 made some change for the better.

 

[wohmongarinf00l]

yup, in civ3 it's all about stacking
i move in stacks....
a landing force usually consists of two groups...
a smaller group of 2-3 transports with 2-3 battleships lands at a location to distract the enemy.....
the main force consists of 4 carriers with bombers only and
6 transports with modern armor or whatever the topshelf
offensive unit, all escorted by 12 battleships. the extra 2 battleships are for neutralising scattered enemy vessels encountered during movement if hostilities have already began. they all move in a single stack headed for a different location of the target civilisation.
let any enemy navy intercept that...i've seen enemy vessels navigate away from the whole battlegroup cos there is no way they are going to field anything to go thru 12 battleships before landing.

 

[friedmad]

the only reason i would position my destroyers around a battle group was for scouting purposes. still, i'd stack a battleship with a destroyer in my pickets.

 

[LaRo]

Originally posted by friedmad
the only reason i would position my destroyers around a battle group was for scouting purposes. still, i'd stack a battleship with a destroyer in my pickets.

Subs are not better for scouting since they are harder to see?

 

[friedmad]

it's true that subs are harder to see, but if someone rolls over on top of one, theyre dead cause of their weak defense. also, they move 2 squares less than other ships, meaning that they could not keep up with the battlegroup.

 

[allhailIndia]

I usually ride out with my battleships and transports and beat the living crap out of those pikemen and musketeers in the enemy cities

 

[Cort Haus]

Originally posted by allhailIndia
I usually ride out with my battleships and transports and beat the living crap out of those pikemen and musketeers in the enemy cities

You need to either move up a level or stop playing Civ 2

 

[Zouave]

Keeping a stack in the open WAS indeed dangerous in Civ 2.

That indeed is an improvement in Civ 3. But Civ 3 failed to give us STACK COMBAT, or STACK BOMBARDMENT - it is still individual unit against individual unit, and w/o stack bombardment it gets tedious.

BUT, Civ 2 allowed us to leave a bomber on a tile, thus interdicting and stopping enemy movement into that tile - a big help when launching an invasion and you are converned about a sudden counterattack, especially when the enemy has railroads.
In this, Civ 2 was better.

 

[Cort Haus]

Originally posted by Zouave
Keeping a stack in the open WAS indeed dangerous in Civ 2.

That indeed is an improvement in Civ 3. But Civ 3 failed to give us STACK COMBAT, or STACK BOMBARDMENT - it is still individual unit against individual unit, and w/o stack bombardment it gets tedious.

I thought that CTP was good in this respect - I liked watching those combined arms battles.

 

[unscratchedfoot]

Originally posted by Zouave
Keeping a stack in the open WAS indeed dangerous in Civ 2.

That indeed is an improvement in Civ 3. But Civ 3 failed to give us STACK COMBAT, or STACK BOMBARDMENT - it is still individual unit against individual unit, and w/o stack bombardment it gets tedious.

BUT, Civ 2 allowed us to leave a bomber on a tile, thus interdicting and stopping enemy movement into that tile - a big help when launching an invasion and you are converned about a sudden counterattack, especially when the enemy has railroads.
In this, Civ 2 was better.

Better???? Where is the realism in a motionless bomber stopping enemy ground troops from advancing? I prefer the airplane style in civ3 with the exception that there are no fighter vs fighter situations. There's way less micromanagement.

 

[Old Fox]

I think alot depends on your game and map size in civ3.
I played one game that became extremely war intensive, and was required to take the battle to the enemy. I set up carrier battle groups also. I was playing on a huge map, and made one battle group for each "theatre or ocean" of play. My battle groups consisted of 2-4 carriers (2 with 4 bombers, and 2 with 4 fighters, or 1 of each), 4 battle ships, 1 aegis cruiser, and 4 destroyers. Believe it or not with this massive navy (I had 6 battle groups), I returned home after sacking capitals with just my carriers in some instances. Never lost one though. The destoyers can "see" the subs, so they are very important. I stack them all on one tile, and use one fighter based carrier for air superiority, which covers the whole group, and one fighter based carrier for recons. The 8 bombers provide massive artillery support for invasions. They also deal effectively with opposition battleships. I found that if I maintained single tile formation, the enemy stayed away, but if I split up at all, they came out in droves with their battleships. I must point out that it takes time to build fleets and get them to where you want them. A couple of times the war was over when they got there. Other times, the enemy civ saw them and capitulated on the spot. (No kidding, this happened twice.) I only recommend them in a conquest oriented game though. Hope this helps.

 

[allhailIndia]

Originally posted by Cort Haus


You need to either move up a level or stop playing Civ 2

I would but........(read my signature)

 

[Albert Einstain]

Just one note for stack-lovers in CIV3:
You can move huge stack on sea in one tile, but it will be enough only one nuclear sub with only one nuclear tactical missle to sink all or most of the the stack. Maximum 2 nuclear tactical missles or ICBMs. And there is no big penalty for using nukes in the sea. No pollution.
BTW, described formation won't help too. IMHO (I am not sure here, not tested yet) ICBM or tactical nuke has 1 square range on sea too. If I am right, to kill your formation 1-2 ICBM or tactical nukes is enough.

 

[sgrig]

Originally posted by Albert Einstain
Just one note for stack-lovers in CIV3:
You can move huge stack on sea in one tile, but it will be enough only one nuclear sub with only one nuclear tactical missle to sink all or most of the the stack. Maximum 2 nuclear tactical missles or ICBMs. And there is no big penalty for using nukes in the sea. No pollution.
BTW, described formation won't help too. IMHO (I am not sure here, not tested yet) ICBM or tactical nuke has 1 square range on sea too. If I am right, to kill your formation 1-2 ICBM or tactical nukes is enough.

But does the AI ever use nukes against ships?!

I understand a human player would use nukes against enemy fleets, but I'm not sure if the Ai would do the same.

 

[Albert Einstain]

Originally posted by sgrig


But does the AI ever use nukes against ships?!

I understand a human player would use nukes against enemy fleets, but I'm not sure if the Ai would do the same.

I always play with AI like with human. It will solve some problems later with expansion pack & multiplayer games