Fogbusting: does it still work?

[JoeBlade]

In pre-2.08 games - or perhaps pre-Warlords - I remember being able to draw barbarians away from my cities by dotting archers on hills a few tiles away from my borders.
These days however I only see the black flags merrily bypass my fogbusters and head straight for my cultural borders, even when those are 4-5 tiles away. Has their detection range or decision-taking algorithm perhaps changed in the latest patches?

Since I only play large or huge maps completely busting all fog is simply not cost-effective, nor is setting up an FB network that covers +5 tiles from my borders. I'm a bit at a loss as to an effective counter now I must admit. Is there a reliable barb-countering strategy that does not involve acquiring copper, horses or iron very early?

This also makes me wonder about the value of Archery. Archers can still defend my cities no doubt, consitently being pillaged back to the stone age is more or less equals a lost game though, so I don't quite see the point of the tech anymore (except as a prerequisite of course).

 

[Sisiutil]

The AI seems smarter in many regards, and that includes the barbarians, including their ability to rate combat odds. I've seen the same behaviour as you since the patch. Barb Axemen now avoid my Praetorians unless the latter are unfortified on open terrain (which is the last place I'd put them when there's an Axeman sniffing about, but I tried it once as an experiment--with predictable results ).

Fog-busting is still somewhat worthwhile to prevent barbs from spawning in certain areas, but as for intercepting barbs, their value has indeed been diminished. Then again, I think this is balanced out by the increased effectiveness of Chariots as early barb-busters.

Nevertheless, I think fogbusters are still useful. They can serve as a distant early warning system, for one, and if posted properly they will still diminish the amount of barb activity.

 

[JoeBlade]

Ah, it seems my fears are confirmed then

I agree it still has its uses but Fogbusting is apparently clearly no longer a viable alternative for early axes/chariots (Great Wall notwithstanding, though that wonder's not really a solution for just any leader)

Shame really, because this does make early religion/wonder strategies somewhat less attractive; locating and settling near those strategic resources becomes a higher priority. Even with peaceful neighbours the likelihood of being overrun by barbs is otherwise just too great from what I've seen.

 

[weimingshi]

barbs is treated as another civ now, if it doesn't know you have a city close by, it will attack your fog buster. but if it a previous barb spotted your city already, it will go for the city.

 

[Silver Marmot]

Barbs definitely play the odds now. The warriors simply ignore my archers and axemen, whereas they used to be free experience.

 

[Chazcon]

I think you're confusing your terminology. 'Fogbusting' is the technique of placing units across un-owned areas of the map so that every tile is visible, in order to prevent Barbarians from spawning. Fogbusting is still a viable technique, but remember it is expensive, as the maintenance on units stationed outside your borders is high.

What you've described would be termed 'Baiting', where you position units in such a way that Barbarians on their way to your civilization will attack them, and destroy themselves while at the same time allowing the 'Bait' units to gain experience. And yes, the newer AI's are amarter and will generally bypass such units. I tend to set up a screen of units 2-3 tiles apart, just inside 'my borders, in good defensible terrain, and support them with stacks of 2-4 cavalry units who can catch the barbs that get through. Once the barbarian threat is over I tend to garrison each city and also concentrate several large armies near potential enemy civs - and use them to attack other civs when the time is right.

Depending on the map, I'll use a few fogbusters and pay the cost, as it's less hassle to just pay to prevent barbarians'. But trying to fogbust a large area is usually prohibitively costly and there I'll use the defensive screen. Almost always I'll use both techniques, again it depends on the map and my city layout.

 

[Sisiutil]

I think Chariots are a better unit for fog-busting than Archers, especially with the Axeman bonus in Warlords.

You can give a Chariot Flanking I and Sentry, increasing its effectiveness as a fog-buster; Archers require a perfectly-located hill to achieve the same result. And Archers don't have the attacking strength now required to take out the barbs they spot. Chariots are also cheap and are available with a very useful worker tech, unlike poor old dead-end Archery; and once their fog-busting days are over, that Sentry promotion comes in handy in a stack for spotting approaching enemies.

 

[JoeBlade]

barbs is treated as another civ now, if it doesn't know you have a city close by, it will attack your fog buster. but if it a previous barb spotted your city already, it will go for the city.

Ah, this must be the key difference. I had already noticed subtle differences - e.g. cities with cultural influence from 'Barbarian State' - but I wasn't aware the barbs are considered a full-fledged civilisation now. They've indeed clearly headed straight for my cities in some recent games, despite my cultural borders being out of their visibility range (e.g. 3 tiles away while in a forested/jungle area)

Bugger, I suppose early axes or chariots really aren't optional anymore then. I must say I've grown very fond of the latter myself though: 2 movement and +100% attack vs. axemen isn't something to look down on

Thanks for the tips everyone.

 

[Jet]

I wasn't aware the barbs are considered a full-fledged civilisation now.

I believe that's not new. What is new is the barbs being less suicidal about what they will attack.

 

[JoeBlade]

I believe that's not new. What is new is the barbs being less suicidal about what they will attack.

Hmm, actually, the main novelty to me here is the barbs heading straight for cities that they cannot even see. Not attacking at suicidal odds is one thing but they do not wander around aimlessly either anymore, they go straight to known city locations even when the individual barbs in question have never even seen my cultural borders. In other words: barbarians do seem to have shared knowledge of the terrain now, just as other civs.

Still, I'm sure they are less inclined to attack at improbable odds than they were before though. Just as some of the other posters in this thread, I distinctly remember racking up many easy XPs on my archers fortified on hills for example, which just doesn't happen anymore now.

 

[uncarved block]

I've never played on Huge maps- not enough computer- but a couple things occurred to me reading this:

Are you building enough Roads? I probably build too many, a habit hanging on from playing Civ2 and 3, but they sure come in handy getting a reaction force to the right spots.

One thing I've noticed is that the Barbs, like the AIs, have their "one best choice" of place to attack: retaking a city, pillaging a resource, or pillaging cottages if they have enough horse units. With a little practice, I can predict where a Barb is headed, and what path it will take, from many squares out. You can even get Barbs to attack defenders in better terrain if it's the next "logical" move-- say you're in the only defensive terrain between the Barb and its target, and the next move would have to be into open terrain. You can still get the odds in your favor, you just have to work at it a little harder, IME.

I've also seen a lot of Barbs "double back" to a defender, especially if you put a good unit between it and your cultural borders. I used to panic every time a Barb walked one square past a defender, but now I wait and see if it will still suicide itself against said defender, given enough encouragement. YMMV.

 

[JoeBlade]

I've never played on Huge maps- not enough computer- but a couple things occurred to me reading this:

Are you building enough Roads? I probably build too many, a habit hanging on from playing Civ2 and 3, but they sure come in handy getting a reaction force to the right spots.

One thing I've noticed is that the Barbs, like the AIs, have their "one best choice" of place to attack: retaking a city, pillaging a resource, or pillaging cottages if they have enough horse units. With a little practice, I can predict where a Barb is headed, and what path it will take, from many squares out. You can even get Barbs to attack defenders in better terrain if it's the next "logical" move-- say you're in the only defensive terrain between the Barb and its target, and the next move would have to be into open terrain. You can still get the odds in your favor, you just have to work at it a little harder, IME.

I've also seen a lot of Barbs "double back" to a defender, especially if you put a good unit between it and your cultural borders. I used to panic every time a Barb walked one square past a defender, but now I wait and see if it will still suicide itself against said defender, given enough encouragement. YMMV.

Oh, don't get me wrong: I manage to handle barbs easily IF I can get sufficiently potent defenders in place. When I do manage to acquire horses or copper early those black flags equal a free level 2-3 for my units.

I've seen a few starts however where no copper or horses were nearby and recently one or two where even iron was miles off. Also, on occasion AH or IW may not actually be the top priority for my overall strategy because some religious tech would be more advantageous for example.
Unfortunately, archers simply cannot stand their ground against barbarians anymore from what I've experienced. Warriors bypass them when they're fortified and even axes frequently opt for pillaging my lands instead. And an archer on the offense - the only alternative - is generally a dead archer.
All in all, not having an early strategic resource nearby, or not connecting it quickly enough, seems to equal virtual non-stop pillaging these days.

 

[uncarved block]

Ah, I see. Sorry for the misunderstanding. The only thing I can think of is relying heavily on a 2:1 war of attrition with the Barbs until something better comes along. Archers with Combat and/or Drill may not be the most useful units in the world, but if the alternative is restarting or losing, they'll have to do. Personally in situations like that I find the AI is far more of a threat than the Barbs, especially if you have a neighbor like Shaka or Alexander, much less Monty or Izzy. Probably less of a factor for you on Huge maps, but until I have a couple hundred extra bucks for a new computer, it's something I won't be able to experience personally.

 

[WuphonsReach]

I play on huge/marathon and the barbs are a royal PITA. Trying to fogbust requires a lot of units if you want to get good coverage (which is expensive). Just too much land to cover and not enough hills.

I always end up chasing the Great Wall wonder to keep them at bay.

... Or maybe because I play with "aggressive barbs" turned on