Haha, I hadn't thought of that strategy! Nice thinking. But do you think 6 XCOMs are enough to take an Information Era city? (I don't know, I've never tried anything so bold, but assuming that they're close to you in tech, my guess would be yes for most cities but no for the capital.)
Domination without ranged units
- Thread starter gobbledydook
- Start date
Haha, I hadn't thought of that strategy! Nice thinking. But do you think 6 XCOMs are enough to take an Information Era city? (I don't know, I've never tried anything so bold, but assuming that they're close to you in tech, my guess would be yes for most cities but no for the capital.)
Two-fold answer to this:
1.) 6 is average, meaning that half the time more are required. The (unmentioned) bonus of putting a spy or diplomat in the capital is that you have vision in a two tile radius of the capital, so you can see what is there and you need to deal with. What happens much more often than not is that this area is pretty clear since even the AI with the best military-industrial complex will concentrate it's troops a.) where it's attacking, b.)where it is being attacked, or c.) where it is plotting to attack, none of which is usually around their capital. Additionally, if the capital has arsenal/military base/hill/30+population/Red Fort/etc. more may be needed. But with mercantilism/Big Ben/mobilization and a decent economy, I can usually rush-buy at least 1 XCOM per turn, up to 3 per turn in my better economic games. As such, if more are required, more are bought. But in the few extreme cases where the opposition seems overwhelming around a particular capital....
2.) ...Stealth Bombers. I think (?) the tech path has most of the same prerequisites as XCOMS; I always seem to unlock them just a few turns later but I'm also mass faith-buying scientists and bulbing at that point. With barracks/armory/military academy plus either Brandenburg Gate or the Total War Autocracy tenet, Stealth Bombers can come off the line with Siege 3, and five of those that can hit a target almost anywhere on the map allows a 1HP XCOM to waltz in.
Alternatively, you can use nukes, but I dislike nukes. Hard resource requirement, have to build an extra wonder, all to make a unit that costs the same as 4 (?) XCOMS and dies after its use. I use nukes only to stifle a civ that may build a spaceship before I can win. In the above strategy, nukes will NOT work if nuking a city ejects your spy/diplomat (I don't know if it does, I don't do it myself) because XCOMS, like Nightcrawler, need to be able to see where they are teleporting to.
Well in the challenge that I was thinking, stealth bombers count as ranged. I would say that nukes count as ranged as well. I certainly had thought of this strategy for standard games. But with the 2 hex vision from your spy, that's 24 hexes on which to land XCOMs (less if any terrain blocks your vision). If your economy can support those reinforcements beyond the original 6, you're right that there's certainly enough room to land enough XCOMs to take out any capital.
Also, your spy does stick it out when you nuke a city. I thought it was a little odd that s/he gets left hung out to dry, but they continue to act as a normal spy after the nuke.
I've been trying to make swordsmen/ longswordsmen rushes work. It seems pretty difficult because you need to be lucky with iron.
I messed up a Samurai rush with japan. I got unlucky and only had 2 iron and a 6 iron patch that I needed a great general to get. You cant build warriors when you can build samurai which messed up the rush and then started gunpower that would obsolete my samurai. So that was a disaster.
I had a more successful rush with roman legions. Building warriors and then instantly upgrading to legions is very powerful. I managed to get to 5 cities but 3 declarations of war have discouraged me from continuing . Any advise on deity swordsmen rushes would be nice
I messed up a Samurai rush with japan. I got unlucky and only had 2 iron and a 6 iron patch that I needed a great general to get. You cant build warriors when you can build samurai which messed up the rush and then started gunpower that would obsolete my samurai. So that was a disaster.
I had a more successful rush with roman legions. Building warriors and then instantly upgrading to legions is very powerful. I managed to get to 5 cities but 3 declarations of war have discouraged me from continuing . Any advise on deity swordsmen rushes would be nice
Melee and siege work just fine. It is that typical internet thinking where if something isn't the absolute best, then it is considered worthless, pointless, unviable. Catapults are tough to use simply because of their production cost and when you can reasonably get them, but trebs, cannon, and of course artillery and beyond can get the job done just fine.
Melee with absolutely NO range support is possible. I believe there have been a few games posted here doing so. IIRC the summary more or less was use cavalry/armor (concentrated fire by moving forward, attacking, and moving back) and it is a bit RNG dependent (lots of flat land cities will be easy, fortified hills blocked by mountains/coast not so much).
Melee with absolutely NO range support is possible. I believe there have been a few games posted here doing so. IIRC the summary more or less was use cavalry/armor (concentrated fire by moving forward, attacking, and moving back) and it is a bit RNG dependent (lots of flat land cities will be easy, fortified hills blocked by mountains/coast not so much).
In BNW Samurai upgrade to Riflemen, and are obsolete with Rifling. You can still train Musketmen, but using Samurai is probably better (at least in flat terrain).
Ahh the vanilla world...where longswordmen are the bread and butter of warmongers.
Some top MP players still think that was the best era for balanced fights.
This I'm certain doesn't work this way because I do it in almost every domination game that I play. It may be a bug, but when you land an XCOM, that unit provides additional sight, and you can land additional XCOMS in the sight that they provide even if that hex was in FoW at the beginning of the turn. So the amount of XCOMS you can land in a single turn is limited only by how many you can build or buy. It's a somewhat trivial point, though, because at that point in the game I'm suiciding the XCOMS and dropping more in to replace, which is another derivitive or my original allotment of 6, because that's how many can attack the city in a single turn.
Thanks Fyar. Good to know. I've often forgone the initial investment of Manhattan primarily because I was uncertain about this.
Something that works better but is EXTREMELY risky is Berserker rushing. Not only is there the same gamble of having sufficient iron, but it also requires going for Metal Casting early, which usually means before Education, the largest degree of risk to the strategy as your research will be notably delayed. However, when all the variables line up right, it's a crazy fun time because they become medieval era tanks! 21 combat strength with 3 moves against c-bows, swords, spears and horseman. Horseman are the tankiest of the lot, but with combat strength 12, the Berserker nearly doubles them. Ranged units are usually the bane of melee units, but Cbows barely score double-digit attacks against Berserkers and the berserkers can 1-shot them with yellow health. Sometimes you'll run into pikes, which is the biggest nuisance, but hopefully the enemy is still transitioning and only has a few of them, plus it's combat strength 21 vs. 16.I've been trying to make swordsmen/ longswordsmen rushes work. It seems pretty difficult because you need to be lucky with iron.
I messed up a Samurai rush with japan. I got unlucky and only had 2 iron and a 6 iron patch that I needed a great general to get. You cant build warriors when you can build samurai which messed up the rush and then started gunpower that would obsolete my samurai. So that was a disaster.
I had a more successful rush with roman legions. Building warriors and then instantly upgrading to legions is very powerful. I managed to get to 5 cities but 3 declarations of war have discouraged me from continuing . Any advise on deity swordsmen rushes would be nice
Or, as mentioned earlier, Impi rushing is pretty dangerous and doesn't require the tech detour.
Also, not sure which version you're playing, but in the most recent version Samarai don't obsolete with rifling, they have a larger window for production. I think it's metallurgy, but can't check it right now. Need verification.
Actually the Berserker rush is probably the least riskier rush out of all rushes using melee units (except Impi's of course), probably the minutemen come close. You get them earlier, this is a big advantage on high difficulties. Metal casting is a good tech and doesn't delay Education that much, in a normal "ranged" domination attempt researching machinery before education is probably best, so metal casting is an even smaller detour, plus you also need engineering unless it's a tradition start. Of course you need iron, but that is uncovered in the ancient era, so you know right from the start if this is possible or not.
I didnt know this. Got to within 2 turns of getting gunpowder and thought what the hell am I doing
. I found legions very powerful 17 vs 14 is quite a strength gap. I think its 40 hammers for warrior then 80 gold to upgrade them. Goner definitely try out a Berserker rush. Trying to do this on Pangaea . I've won with Berserkers on archipelago. That's loads of fun
Wondering how many cities for a swordsmen rush and how many for a longswordsmen rush. Obviously it depends on map but I'm thinking 2-3. If build 4, librarys and national college then its not really a rush.
Samurai obsolete at rifling, meaning it's an even larger window since rifling comes after metallurgy. They also upgrade to riflemen, which is kind of a disadvantage since it will be harder and harder to keep them alive until then.
Berserkers obsolete at Metallurgy and upgrade to musketmen. It is pretty weird since you can build both berserkers and musketmen at the same time. The cool thing about the Danes in this non-ranged scenario is that right after metallurgy you can get rifling and upgrade the berserkers to musketmen and then to the ski infantry. So you go from UU to UU but the ski infantry is not really that special since you are probably never going to use the ability at all.
I have never been able to get traction with Berserkers, but I may not be trying hard enough, or not have enough skills. Does anyone have a Deity maps to share? I would love to see them for CDG. The AIs were all buffed when Denmark was offered in the DCL. I didn't see any 'zerker rushes in the write ups!
Except the biggest disadvantage is that the berserkers lose their 1 extra movement point on upgrade. Those are the two biggest advantages of the unit, early access to a strength 21 unit and an extra movement point, and since the rest of the Denmark package is mediocre (being generous there), I try to keep them at berserker level until their iron is absolutely needed for frigates. In my opinion, if Berserkers kept their additional movement point on upgrade, they'd move from a weak tier 3 civ to a solid tier 2.
You have the skills. Trying really hard not to say, "the right way to play Denmark is..." but to take full advantage of berserkers you need to beeline Metal Casting, get it before education and possibly even before Civil Service, which is counter to standard deity tech-pathing and for more experienced players like you it's like retraining muscle memory.
It's viable, even on Immortal/Deity, although not 100%. I'd say certain "circumstances" strongly bend the chances towards you:
Game Speed - Slower Speed is beneficial
UUs - Kris Swordsman, Samurai, Minutemen, Janissary, etc. I believe to make a difference
Neighbours - Obviously against warmongers/prepared AIs wars can be much harder
Priorities - Obviously the top of the tech tree needs to give way to the bottom. And FFS don't go Tradition if you want to do early wars (think Ancient - Renaissance):
Liberty gives you needed hammers, worker, settler (things you don't want to waste too much time on!)
Honor gives you GGs, more damage, more EXP!, less gold for upgrading!, GOLD for KILLS! Don't ignore the Honor Tree, it's viable!
Piety (You probably stopped reading here) is very, very, very, very, very... very rarely an option - to secure a high faith generating religion with Holy Warriors and 20% less faith for units/building with faith! I'll work 1/50 games, but when it does - you can get an erection.
And I hope I don't have to say this, but melee units MUST be combined with siege to work!
Game Speed - Slower Speed is beneficial
UUs - Kris Swordsman, Samurai, Minutemen, Janissary, etc. I believe to make a difference
Neighbours - Obviously against warmongers/prepared AIs wars can be much harder
Priorities - Obviously the top of the tech tree needs to give way to the bottom. And FFS don't go Tradition if you want to do early wars (think Ancient - Renaissance):
Liberty gives you needed hammers, worker, settler (things you don't want to waste too much time on!)
Honor gives you GGs, more damage, more EXP!, less gold for upgrading!, GOLD for KILLS! Don't ignore the Honor Tree, it's viable!
Piety (You probably stopped reading here) is very, very, very, very, very... very rarely an option - to secure a high faith generating religion with Holy Warriors and 20% less faith for units/building with faith! I'll work 1/50 games, but when it does - you can get an erection.
And I hope I don't have to say this, but melee units MUST be combined with siege to work!
I don't see Mandekalu Cavalry mentioned here. It is a very viable unit if you can manage to spam it in the appropriate time. It has 20 strength vs 21 of the longsword (and samurai/berserker), but with only 110 hammer cost instead of 120. The 4 movement lets you hit cities and then retreat and if you use them in a mix with longswords you can conquer cities very easily. The songhai also have amphibious promotions for all units, so atacking over river isn't a problem, just like the berserkers.
Thanks for the encouragement, but I lack your optimism!
Nice! I have not tried that!
TheMeInTeam
If A implies B...
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2008
- Messages
- 27,989
You can do it but with 1 UPT concentrating damage on individual units or a city to kill them is key. By far the units best suited to this are ranged (can attack from spots other units can't attack) and mounted (can attack, then move away to clear room for follow up attack).
The reason ranged tends to be preferred is the city attack penalty on mounted; I think if mounted units didn't have city attack penalty they'd still be a very popular option for domination games in single player (similar to how I abused them early vanilla). The suggestion of Songhai's UU is a good example of that. You can have 4-8 cavalry hitting a city in a single turn and if they're not taking a penalty that's a lot of damage if you get them fast.
IMO using trebs is basically just replacing one ranged unit for another
. They do more damage to cities but their setup time and frail nature offset that a bit. If xbow can move into range of city --> shoot then it takes a while for a treb to catch the damage done to the city; essentially both are siege units but xbow is more versatile and easier to pre-train.
You can spam swords like crazy with Iroquois, run UUs with Danes/Romans/Japanese/Songhai/etc, but for generic domination pure melee seems like handicapping oneself for fun. I haven't tried in a long time, how reluctant is the AI to fork cities now? You could go with a horseman --> mow down units --> take cities in peace deal strat to expand and then uprade to super tanks later but it seems excessively inefficient.
The main problem is how city strength scales against melee strength before infantry, and how slow infantry is as a melee attacking unit.
The reason ranged tends to be preferred is the city attack penalty on mounted; I think if mounted units didn't have city attack penalty they'd still be a very popular option for domination games in single player (similar to how I abused them early vanilla). The suggestion of Songhai's UU is a good example of that. You can have 4-8 cavalry hitting a city in a single turn and if they're not taking a penalty that's a lot of damage if you get them fast.
IMO using trebs is basically just replacing one ranged unit for another
. They do more damage to cities but their setup time and frail nature offset that a bit. If xbow can move into range of city --> shoot then it takes a while for a treb to catch the damage done to the city; essentially both are siege units but xbow is more versatile and easier to pre-train.You can spam swords like crazy with Iroquois, run UUs with Danes/Romans/Japanese/Songhai/etc, but for generic domination pure melee seems like handicapping oneself for fun. I haven't tried in a long time, how reluctant is the AI to fork cities now? You could go with a horseman --> mow down units --> take cities in peace deal strat to expand and then uprade to super tanks later but it seems excessively inefficient.
The main problem is how city strength scales against melee strength before infantry, and how slow infantry is as a melee attacking unit.
Acken
Deity
Yes you basically use siege as your range. You will also have to rely on a higher tech gap than with archers because of less efficient units.
But wouldn't you consider siege units ranged units ? Because it's no impressive feat to win domination with artilleries or canons.
For pure melee it's trickier but like I said mostly a matter of a bigger gap. It's as a result also difficulty dependent, winning domination with minutemen on immortal is trivial.
Similar threads
