Galen Dietenger
Chieftain
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2001
- Messages
- 42
Artillery like many things in Civ3 is something I wonder if It was given much thought as too what role it was intended to play(like aircraft-we all seem to pretty much reached the conclusion its a waste of time and resources to build planes). What Im wondering for those that do use artillery on a regular basis, what and how are you useing it, Defensively or offensively?.
Artillery on the offense-Comments
In my experince I quickly noted that artillery on the offensive isnt very viable for the obvious reason, it just cant keep up with other units and waiting for the artillery units to catch up seriously hinders my battle plans. Once they hit a ZOC they move like slugs and consequently, I end up leaveing them behind, they rarely are in good position to move+support faster moveing units. Also the extra turns you wait to get your arty in position, thats more time for the AI to prepare there defence. This applies to all eras but even in the modern age, despite artillery being almost as mobile and as mechanzied as the army its in, simply cant keep up to cavalry and tanks. When you add in the collateral damage they cause to citys-ie hit everything but want you WANT hit, and there lack of mobility, its hard not to view them as more hinderance than help. Artillery is also a 'soft unit' like workers and the AI goes after unguarded units like bees on honey and its easy to forget to guard your artillery esp. in a larger battle area
Artillery on the defense-Comments
Here at least artillery is quasi useful. In prepared positions or citys they get that 'free shot' attempt to wear down attacking units, helpful as far as that goes-but rarely decisive either. On the attack I often end up with tons of captured artillery that honestly I dont really know what do with. If masses of enemies are attacking a city and you can move them freely, in your own ZOC, then massing them for defensive bombardments is sometimes useful-even helpful, but how often is that going to occur? Also artillery has had its effectiveness somewhat mitigated vs massed targets by not allowing 'splash damage' of any kind. This of course runs counter to the logical expectation(and knowlegde) that barrages vs tightly packed masses of attackers would be more effective than vs dispersed units.Or put another way arty does tons of collaterl damage vs non military targets, but is not given the same ability vs military units-bit of a disconnect there conceptually.
Some additional things to consider, we know that artillery in civ3 *had* to be differernt than civ2 simply because once you got howitzers, and could produce them in quantity, the AI was finished. In my civ2 armys, howitzers comprised over 70% of my units and supplied virtually ALL my offensive firepower, in short, they made victory a foregone conclusion. So its not hard to see why a repeat of that isnt desirable. But civ3 is filled with units thats capabilities are either too low, too slow, broken, bugged or just not very practical to use in most instances.
So how\often are we useing the 'big guns' or are they just another idea in civ3 that didnt quite make the mark?
Artillery on the offense-Comments
In my experince I quickly noted that artillery on the offensive isnt very viable for the obvious reason, it just cant keep up with other units and waiting for the artillery units to catch up seriously hinders my battle plans. Once they hit a ZOC they move like slugs and consequently, I end up leaveing them behind, they rarely are in good position to move+support faster moveing units. Also the extra turns you wait to get your arty in position, thats more time for the AI to prepare there defence. This applies to all eras but even in the modern age, despite artillery being almost as mobile and as mechanzied as the army its in, simply cant keep up to cavalry and tanks. When you add in the collateral damage they cause to citys-ie hit everything but want you WANT hit, and there lack of mobility, its hard not to view them as more hinderance than help. Artillery is also a 'soft unit' like workers and the AI goes after unguarded units like bees on honey and its easy to forget to guard your artillery esp. in a larger battle area
Artillery on the defense-Comments
Here at least artillery is quasi useful. In prepared positions or citys they get that 'free shot' attempt to wear down attacking units, helpful as far as that goes-but rarely decisive either. On the attack I often end up with tons of captured artillery that honestly I dont really know what do with. If masses of enemies are attacking a city and you can move them freely, in your own ZOC, then massing them for defensive bombardments is sometimes useful-even helpful, but how often is that going to occur? Also artillery has had its effectiveness somewhat mitigated vs massed targets by not allowing 'splash damage' of any kind. This of course runs counter to the logical expectation(and knowlegde) that barrages vs tightly packed masses of attackers would be more effective than vs dispersed units.Or put another way arty does tons of collaterl damage vs non military targets, but is not given the same ability vs military units-bit of a disconnect there conceptually.
Some additional things to consider, we know that artillery in civ3 *had* to be differernt than civ2 simply because once you got howitzers, and could produce them in quantity, the AI was finished. In my civ2 armys, howitzers comprised over 70% of my units and supplied virtually ALL my offensive firepower, in short, they made victory a foregone conclusion. So its not hard to see why a repeat of that isnt desirable. But civ3 is filled with units thats capabilities are either too low, too slow, broken, bugged or just not very practical to use in most instances.
So how\often are we useing the 'big guns' or are they just another idea in civ3 that didnt quite make the mark?
