Exploiting Momentary Advantages

[Sun-Pin]

In all of these messages, there is probably a thread like this, but I couldn't find it.

As in the real world, Civ III permits the expansionist civilization an opportunity to promote it's vision of empire by exploiting momentary advantages in technology. The question is where do people see them?

The early UU's of Persians and Romans are clear examples of superiority that often leads to military conquest, but even swordsmen by themselves are sufficient against one who does not have iron working.

Knights are truly the queens of the battlefield and have an advantage against most other units until the advent of cavalry.

My favorite short-term advantage is in the pre-tank era when one has the ability to use artillery and infantry in combination with cavalry before the enemy has replaceable parts. It's a momentary advantage, but one that will cost the AI some choice cities in a quick war of consolidation.

 

[Arrian]

I'll start a bit earlier: Archers vs. warrior-protected AI settlers. When playing China or Rome, I'm all about that. Plus, in ultra-early warfare, the AI typically just produces archers and sends them at you piecemeal. Hang out on a hill or mountain with a couple of archers & a spearman, and it's like ducks in a barrel.

Persian Immortals or Iroquois Mounted Warriors vs. nearly any unit of their era (Hoplites, Num Mercs, and Legionaries will make things interesting).

Knights, particularly if you get to hit an AI without iron and/or feudalism. But even against pikemen, they rule the battlefield. This includes some fantastic UU's too, such as the Rider.

Cavalry, particularly if you can hit an AI without musketmen. Even then, Cav in numbers will roll right over muskets. It's riflemen that will cause pain (but again, with large enough numbers, you will still win).

Cav + Inf + Arty vs. Cav & Rifles is indeed fun. The enemy literally cannot counterattack, since your infantry will slaughter anything they throw against it.

Tanks vs. Inf or anything lesser. I've fought precisely 1 war with Tanks against Mech Inf, and do NOT want to repeat the experience.

MA vs. Infantry is utterly unstoppable.

My favorite? Probably Knights vs. ironless and/or feudalismless enemies. Knights killing spearmen, horsemen, archers... it's full-spectrum dominance. And there are lots of uses for Great Leaders around that time (FP/Palace move if not already done, Sistine, Sun Tzu, Leo, Bach, Smith, Magellan, even Copernicus & Newton if the leaders are comin' fast 'n furious).

-Arrian

 

[Belisar]

You seem to concentrate on technological advantages, which i doubt you
can achieve on higher difficult levels.
On strategy is to use the concept
of strategic ressources (stop them to get iron in the acient age,
oil in the modern age ...) by making the ressource tiles your initial invasion goal.
Sometimes, when your enemy buys the ress., you can even
be more smarter and use diplomacy (embargos, MI).
Apart from this, there is also no problem for fighting with equal
technology (swords against swords, ...), because your tactical skill
should be way better than the AI's. (Everyone can roll quickly over rifles with
modern amor but it takes some skill to do it with cavs and artillery)

 

[Thrawn]

I tend to think that an excellent strategy and enough numbers will overcome any foe. No matter what your tech level is compared to the ai.

 

[newbiebad]

Well Arrian CERTAINLY isn't someone who only plays lower levels. If you've seen him over at Apolyton, you'd find he's a scary guy. Even on Deity, getting a momentary military advantage isn't impossible. As an expansionist Civ + luck I've managed to blitz my way into the medieval age WELL before even the Deity AI once or twice. Or I can very occasionally pass them if that Civ has been embroiled in a long war with some other neighbor.

Sure fighting the AI on equal footing isn't a tough task but thats not what this thread is about. I personally do the mild archer rush if I see an opening. I also follow up with a swordsman war as well if I feel threatened. Swordsman/horsie vs spearman is pretty advantageous IMO. As I approach fuedalism I phase my production towards more horsies and later do a massive knight upgrade/blitz. After this stage I just attack with whatever units I have availible. Doesn't take a genius to figure out how to use cavalry, tank, infantry or MA against a less advanced Civ.

 

[Belisar]

Originally posted by newbiebad
..fighting the AI on equal footing isn't a tough task but thats not what this thread is about.

The thread is about "Momentary Advantages"
and i wanted to point out that they don't have to be on the tech front (which is hard to achieve on emperor and deity from my experience).
Btw, your acient age strategy seems to be "always war". and that is even harder

 

[newbiebad]

Well I can see why you might think I'm in "always war" mode but I tend to oscillate. I don't really see the point of dragging out wars and I only tend to fight when it is to my "momentary" advantage. IMO there is a pretty big gap between a short archer rush and the buildup of veteran swordies/horsies. Also, unless you are launching a long campaign you will have a decent break before Knights.

And yes, if you have more troops than your enemy then you obviously have the advantage. Also, if your troops are in position to take their cities while they are distracted and so on...

Arrian and I were probably just focusing more on the technological aspect.

For some strange reason I find the rolleyes smiley to be very offensive in a sarcastic sort of way. Heh. I'm a psycho aren't I? Maybe its just me but I've always had a gut reaction to such a facial reaction in real life.

 

[Belisar]

Originally posted by newbiebad

Arrian and I were probably just focusing more on the technological aspect.

Agreed

Originally posted by newbiebad

For some strange reason I find the rolleyes smiley to be very offensive in a sarcastic sort of way.

It was not ment to be offensive, just reflective

 

[Arrian]

Belisar,

For the record, I play mostly on Monarch, sometimes on Emperor. I do not expect the tech advantage to be more than momentary on Emperor (at least not in the early to mid game), while on Monarch I hope to gain and hold a tech lead.

Archer v. Warrior in the early game doesn't signify a tech advantage at all - the AI is probably ahead, but doesn't necessary have many spearmen yet.

Knights vs. Spears can be done against an equal-tech foe, but you have to cut their resources (and/or trade routes, depending). Been there, done that.

There is a reason I hate the nationalism tech. It gives the AI a new no-resources-required defender. No way to knock them back to spears. So you either have to use: a) overwhelming numbers of Cav, b) Artillery/Inf/Cav, trading speed for caution, or c) wait for Tanks.

Fighting on even terms can be done, quite successfully, because as you point out, the AI isn't really any good at war. But if I have the opportunity, I'd much rather add numerical and technological superiority to my tactical superiority. Mass upgrades & resource denial + good building for a tech lead. And a spot 'o luck is nice too.

-Arrian

 

[Peter Harris]

Momentary advantages come in many forms. It could be any of: tech advantage, resource advantage or deprivation, local advantage, number of units, balance of alliances etc.

I had one emperor game in which I was attempting a one city challenge on a tiny archipelago map. Towards the end there were three civs remaining. The Romans were twice the size of me and the Germans combined and had a goodly tech lead. The Romans had two sources of oil on two different islands (both taken from Germany in middle ages), I had one oil and the Germans none.

Rome attacked Germany so I offered Bismark an alliance which lead to a series of wars with Rome. When the first war started I and the Germans had cavalry and battleships, the Romans had mech infantry and battleships. My destroyers and German ironclads bombarded the two oil sources constantly while my battleships took out the Roman battleships. The result was absolute naval superiority (at heavy cost) so I and the Germans could attack the two oil cities without interference. That was a momentary advantage and our only advantage. Cavalry against mech infantry is really ugly even with support from battleships. I captured one city after losing a horde of cavalry and some shiny new tanks (got the technology during the war). The Germans flipped/propaganda the other city (they did not take it by force). It was a OCC so I had to give my city to Bismark, drat.

This momentary advantage of resource deprivation allowed a localised advantage of freedom to attack without possibility of enemy reinforcements leading to the permanent advantage of the Romans being permanently deprived of oil (but they had enormous numbers of mech infantry and modern armour) and therefore unable to build a modern navy meaning no ability to invade us or to recapture the oil. If we had not capitalised on this momentary advantage Rome would have swallowed Germany completely, then swallowed me.

The second and third wars involved Babylonian and German battleships standing off the coast blowing improvements to smithereens but not strong enough to capture anything on the main islands. All this destruction meant we were able to eventually catch up on tech.

Umh, I still lost the game on points and the Roman spaceship was closer to completion then mine. (and my oil disappeared on the turn that I finished researching modern armour!)