Catapults or chariots

[Pikachu]

There is a catapult discussion going on in the worst unit thread, but I think that discussion deserves its own thread.

In civ1 there is a very long time where you have the choice between two very different types of powerful attack units: The slow and very powerful catapult or the fast and somewhat less powerful chariot or knight. What attack unit do you prefer and how do you use it? I want this discussion to concentrate on the time before metallurgy changes the game, and bribery with diplomat does not count as an attack.

 

[punkbass2000]

Chariot. I always found slow-movers to not be very useful in Civ 1/2 because of stack kills. Should my enemy have a couple chariots sitting in their city they can wipe out my stack easily enough, even if I have several phalanx and split my stack into three parts when going right beside the city.

 

[The Last Conformist]

I agree pretty much entirely with punkbass2000. In fact, when CivIII came around, it took me a while to realize the value of Swordsmen as attackers.

 

[Craig_San]

I go for catapults - and I see it like this:
- If you attack with a chariot and it crumbles: You have to ask yourself "What If I had used a catapult?"
- If you attack with a cataput, you know that you did the best you could.
- When you build a chariot, you pay a premium for a unit with defensive capabilities - this is a waste if you are not going to be defending with the unit.
- The AI usually garisons defensive units in their cities and rarely attacks from inside.
- If you see AI offensive units coming, make sure that you don't end your turn in stiking distance. Let them come up to you and hit them next turn.
- I usually send out phalanxes with my chariots to defend my newly conquered cities.
- I only go to war after I have taken all of the free land. By this time I usually have a road network and so movement is not so slow.
- Slow movement is not a big problem if you are defending.

- A veteran catapult has only 1 point less attack than an Armour.

Ha - AI Chariots - Not so scary.

 

[Dack]

Pikachu,
Why did you lump Chariots and Knights together? Chivalry needs the dead-end technologies of Feudalism and Horseback Riding.

What I like to do is have my first city builds 3 militia and then a settler to build the second city. The militia move out as soon as they a built. When they make contact with other civilizations, I always making peace and exchanging advances. Using the militia to block the other civilizations. I try to cover as much ground on the home island as possible and confining the AI civilizations to the smallest amount of ground. After 3 or 4 cities, and developing or trading the core advances Pottery, Ceremonial Burial, Alphabet, etc… I don’t trade if offered horseback riding. Once I gain Mathematics I don’t trade with civilizations that don’t have mathematics (this maybe a useless precaution, as I don’t think they use them to their full advantage). I attempt to have a settler building a road towards their city to allow faster movement. Move next to their city or cities with an appropriate number of catapults and hammer away. Always make peace and ask for tribute. Of course this is an over simplification but the just of it is:
Move out early and block, develop a core civilization, attack with catapults as the principle weapon. Maybe a chariot for exploration if a large amount of land is behind the cities you capture/destroy.


(King level, Large land masses)

 

[GoldBerg]

catapults to defend cities,
chariots to defend and attack 'in the field'.

both are in 'ancient times' in need.

(i mostly just attack to defend -
i usually 'work' with diplomats and money)

i build ironclads as fast as available to defend my (city walled) cities at seaside.
i usually try just to build units that are as good in defense as useful for attacks.

defense-in-need:
attack an other tribes military unit (not settlers) when it steps on one of my city squares...

 

[Licentia]

Pikachu,
Why did you lump Chariots and Knights together? Chivalry needs the dead-end technologies of Feudalism and Horseback Riding.

What I like to do is have my first city builds 3 militia and then a settler to build the second city. The militia move out as soon as they a built. When they make contact with other civilizations, I always making peace and exchanging advances. Using the militia to block the other civilizations. I try to cover as much ground on the home island as possible and confining the AI civilizations to the smallest amount of ground. After 3 or 4 cities, and developing or trading the core advances Pottery, Ceremonial Burial, Alphabet, etc… I don’t trade if offered horseback riding. Once I gain Mathematics I don’t trade with civilizations that don’t have mathematics (this maybe a useless precaution, as I don’t think they use them to their full advantage). I attempt to have a settler building a road towards their city to allow faster movement. Move next to their city or cities with an appropriate number of catapults and hammer away. Always make peace and ask for tribute. Of course this is an over simplification but the just of it is:
Move out early and block, develop a core civilization, attack with catapults as the principle weapon. Maybe a chariot for exploration if a large amount of land is behind the cities you capture/destroy.


(King level, Large land masses)

Exploiting the dumb AI to the fullest. I always feel guilty for that though.

I tried what people suggested here, using Catapults instead, along with a Phalanx for defense. Yes, you can lose both the Phalanx and Catapult, but so far it hasn't happened often, and I had great success conquering China (I was Aztecs). I barely lost any units at all (most just Catapults that died attacking the city), granted this was against China who was pretty weak at the time and not against the Mongols when they have 25 offensive units to throw at you. I kept my Phalanx and Catapult on terrain that added at least 50% to their defense as often as possible. This in comparison to taking out a bunch of Chariots that die like crazy against a walled city. Yes, you could use diplomats first with Chariots to destroy the walls, which would make it easier, but I don't find that to be that realistic, and I find it a pain sending 3-5 diplomats into a city to get the barracks.

 

[covok48]

I usually start out with chariots to attack. But once the AI starts building city walls, then I simply have to change to catapults for any hope to capture such cities.

 

[Conrino]

Build a trade-based empire with two defensive units in each city and a high science rate. Use engineers to spread your empire like the plague, and use diplomats to bribe the strongest enemy cities. Don't build wonders-Let someone else do it FOR you

 

[Irish Caesar]

Well, The Wheel has no prerequisites, right?
So the powerful chariot is dominant from turn 1!

Although, I recently had a game where I conquered the world with chariots, going against riflemen and such. They're quite good.

But chariots are the first priority.

 

[trada]

Ditto.
I learn bronze workings then the wheel.

 

[Mongols_rule]

Cavalries are very versatile and easy to produce. You will have a capable army in a matter of turns. They take far less time to make than mammoths like catapults or chariots. I build chariots more than catapults - for me they're just too slow. I like speed over power!

In terms of Chariot vs. Catapult = definitely Chariot.