Defense Units

[sealboy6]

I was wondering about this during my most recent game. What is teh minimum number of units you should have defending a city? I usually stick with 2 or 3 of the best at the time: archer, longbowman...

 

[Maestro_Innit]

I like to have at least 3.

A top defender (archer / longbow)
A top melee (axe / mace)
A top skirmisher (horse / chariot) to get rid of nasty Barbs and people after my mines.

That's as a minimum. Obviously in border towns and places which need more defending I use maybe 3 or 4 times that lot.

 

[Dueck]

3 is a pretty solid minimum... any lower than that and you're risking an unexpected invasion to lose you a perfectly defendable city. I like to have a couple good garrison units (archer, longbowman, grenadier, rifleman, infantry) and a mounted unit or two to pick off would-be pillagers. Generally, though, I play the warmonger, so I just keep a few random left-overs from production in my city.

 

[Mooncusser]

I tend to not keep too many, and I also tend to let them get quite out of date before I replace them. Maybe this is why the AI tends to invade me a lot?...

(I have been known to have one or two Archers defending a city when Grenadiers and Riflemen are the technological norm.)

This is one are of the game where I need to get better. I am still stuck in the Civ 2 - 3 thinking pattern of just hang on and build until you are so big that if the AI starts a war you might lose a city, but you will quickly return in a counter-wave that will wipe them out.

I seem to not be able to get far enough ahead technologically to make this work, and the AI attacks with a bit more force and planning now such that the initial AI attack wave can't be so easily worn down and turned away.

 

[Yzen Danek]

1 or 2 in my interior cities, usually 9-10 in each of the cities that face the direction of expected attacks, and usually another 5-6 in the cities one tier in from the expected direction of attack to act as support for those cities while still being able to cross the continent one turn faster for an unexpected direction of attack, and then usually 3-4 of the best naval units available per coastal city; fewer if I have good chokepoints.

I'm finding that the only way I can win Emporer games is to be fairly steadily at war, though. Because the AI gets such huge advantages, the only way for me to steadily outpace them is to take more land everytime the growth of my cities (and therefore the rate of increase of my commerce) begins to slow. So, I engulf one Civ, rebuild and refit my armies, let the populace forget about their war weariness, and then engulf the next one.

 

[Landmonitor]

I like to keep archer/longbow or city defence musketman, axeman or crossbowman/maceman, spearman/pikeman, and horse archer/knight.

Then, when the time comes, two riflemen (one city defence for sure) and one cavalry, and one machine gun. Later, tanks replace cavalry (not really gunships, I like tanks better for local defence), and infantry/marines/Mech replace the riflemen.

I think its important in the early game to keep an anti-cavalry guy around.

 

[AtomicTank]

I am a fairly strong believer in:

1) one or two cheaper units with a defense bonus, such as archer or longbow;

2) one anti-mounted unit, such as spear or pikeman;

3) one anti-melee unit, such as crossbowman or maceman.

#1 is never supposed to leave the city, while #2 and #3 might leave the city for a good target of opportunity.

Later in the game, it is:

1) 1-2 machine guns, and

2) 1-2 musketman/infantry/mechanized infantry.

 

[AngryPants]

You absolutely can't forget to include an offensive unit in your border city defenses. This can be a chariot, swordsman or perhaps an axeman or even a longbowman with 1st strike. I tend to favor a "forward-leaning" defense posture. If you find yourself neglecting to build enough garrison units, here is my suggestion: build lots of farms and use the heriditary rule civic. That will quickly encourage you to build more units.

 

[Archbob]

It depends on the relative strengh of your opponents and what kind of map your playing on. If on Pangea, I tend to have more. If I'm playing on Archipelago or island. I tend to Sacrifice city defense for a stronger Navy.

 

[DarkSchneider]

If a computer is unable to get to a city in one turn there is no point in stationing more than 1 unit in that city. Using 3-12 defenders per city is the main reason the computer loses wars despite production bonuses, you should bring as many units as possible on offense and then back fill from your producing cities. If your city can be reached by the computer in one turn it should probably have between 2 and 5 defenders depending on the number of units that could reach it.

 

[josephstalin]

Minimum is 1 as there is no reason to have 3 defenders in the middle of empire.

 

[lawren65]

I believe the best defense is a strong offense. No use wasting hammers on units that sit around and do nothing but read forums all day If I have a decent unit, its out on the front.

Most of my force is mobile and ready to be on the offensive

2-3 modern defenders at the border cities.
1 old defender at the core with cash on hand to upgrade and rush buy.
(I played an entire emporer conquest race through to modern armor with a warrior in my capital) BTW, AFAIK when you rush buy, the unit starts to defend before the AI gets to attack so as long as you pay attention you can always upgrade and buy another defender before they attack. I'd even go with 0 defenders in my core it if wasn't for the happiness penalty.

One exception is amphibious assaults. I should probably be more leary of leaving old units in coastal cities, but so far the AI hasn't been smart enough to suprise attack with an amphibious assault.

 

[Yzen Danek]

Minimum is 1 as there is no reason to have 3 defenders in the middle of empire.

Sure there is. Defenders in the middle of your empire can reach either side quicker than defenders all the way on the other side of your empire. When I suspect I could be attacked from either side, I would much rather have some of my units able to respond to either threat. It's a lot more efficient than having two full standing defensive armies without overlap.

 

[Landmonitor]

I've found its very important to keep a good garrison and a small offensive group (like 3 units maximum) on the border of Civ B if you're at war with Civ A in case of surprises. I've also found that keeping a smaller secondary group that is completely removed from the main offensive group (again, no more than 3-4 units, no catapults, just a good mix of rocks, paper, and scissors) to go foraging through the enemy's territory to distract his defenders from your main attack.

This may sound luxurious, but if you know a war is coming, its not hard to get this together. Also, this is purely AI fighting. For multiplayer, it would depend on too many other things, and chances are, if you're opponent is as good as you, he'll likely be able to hit you in at least one place where you're not ready (trick is to do it before he's ready to!)

 

[strategywins]

I try to get an archer in each city early in the game. The cities most likely to get attacked get one or two of the offensive units that are available (warrior at first then axman or swordsman). These would be cities on borders with other civs or near open areas that could get barb attacks. Once I get to longbowman I try to put one on every city. Then when I get machine guns I try to do the same. I will sometimes sentry a group of three cavalry relatively central to my civ to react to and attack. If things are tight I migh leave a couple of central cities with only one unit and move their units to the outside.

 

[JerichoHill]

I tend to only have enough city garrison to quell unhappiness.

I'm busy putting my guys on defensible positions at the border (melee in forested hills, archers on hill, mounted guys in forts) or on key resources.

I tend towards RRF strategy

 

[Wodan]

Minimum is 1 as there is no reason to have 3 defenders in the middle of empire.

Agreed. The poll was worded poorly.

Also, defender numbers tend to increase (for me anyway) as the game goes on. I can both afford and need more units on my border cities.

Furthermore, cities bordering on hostile or aggressive neighbors get additional units.

Anyway, as it is, 100% of poll respondents should really say "0-1".

Wodan