Discussion in 'Civ3 - Strategy & Tips' started by Artillery, Nov 25, 2004.
@AA-battery: Seen you have not the power of the Tomoyoda great!
I don't catch on. What does this have to do with artillery?
The grammarness part of your post.
What about it?
On Sid, i didn't dare to attack with "normal" units yet. There i start from the very beginning of the game with mass bombardment stacks.
On deity i use them very few. Only a small number to defend strategic keypoints that i am not planning to move for quite a while. (From Napolion, Hittler and many more i have learned not to attack on 2 sides ! )
On any lower difficulty not because speed and versatillity is better there.
Exactly right. 40 catapults don't come anywhere close to sucking in the ancient age.
well .. i use captured catapults but i dont often build them. early in the game i struggle to have a plausible army of any sort (emperor/deity) and while i *like* catapults i like horses more, so cats get neglected.
It seems like perfectly correct grammar to me, chump.
All siege weapons are useless, until cannons/H'wacha. That said, I may keep captured catapults around, since several of the AI civs seem to build crazy amounts of them, and I might like a head-start for a cheap artillery army.
There are two things wrong and that is only the beginning of the sentence. The "seems" needs a capital and "like cannon are" is improper wording. Next time have evidence to back your words, spammer!
As for catapults, They are only good for defence in my opinion.
I think the there were more than three "big guns" at Balaclava
I definitely build them.
I think catapults are reasonably effective against enemy units out in the open - at least on PTW. You need a lot more of them to be useful on a city siege.
I use them more on the harder levels since I am more likely to be on the defensive.
I always use them in combined arms AA stacks of swords, spears, archers, and horses.
But the poem was using the word "cannon" to refer to multiple "big guns". I've seen that use quite a lot. And the Oxford English Dictionary supports using the word cannon as its own plural.
Cannon is a plural term as well as singular. I should know, I've read the dictionary. Twice.
Anyways, catapaults are, in my opinion, completely and utterly useless. I'm big on HUGE artillery attacks though...I like cannon....
That's what I was trying to say...in a rather obscure way...
Edit: But to comment on-topic, I don't build many bombardment weapons until artillery is available, because I can rarely afford to upgrade them.
I start building when artilery comes.
I thought that they are all useless, but now I see (on Emepror) that I need them.
It depends of the game but also on availability of ressources.
One of the last game I played, I had no Horses and no iron, I had to fight an early war on Deity. Catapults was the way to go; I had to fight Spearman and Swordsman with Archers, Archers are fine when Spearman and Swordsman have been redlined.
Now if you have access to horses and/or iron then you may not need catapults.
Catapult is very usefull/powerful weapon for defensive war, but i would not use it for offensive war, catapult is much too slow and it requires ROAD
I use them only for attack purpouses, when I march on the enemy capital. Other than that, I waste shields on something more harmful.
Only for defense. I could never keep a escort with them long enough for them to be useful.
Separate names with a comma.