Modern Warfare guidelines

[Vlad Tepes III]

Once steam engine has been discovered and you can build a substantial fleet, there should be NO GROUND COMBAT whenever applicable. I've found that sieging a city with musketeers fortified inside, can be a terrible meatgrinder if a blitzkrieg-like strategy isn't applied. This is assuming you are fighting a non-landlocked country, with seaports. Destroy all units in the city with the fleet, if you can't do that then blast them with cannon, and THEN swarm with infantry and calvalry. Ideally, this will save many units of infantry.
A lightning fast invasion can be accomplished with loaded galleons and ironclads. Ready the pieces two spaces from the cities, in the ocean. When ready send in ironclads and blast the city until defenseless and then move the galleons in and send an appropriate amount of ground troops. Island nations can be eradicated in one move.
After this point in science it just gets easier. Planes and tanks make it easy to duplicate a German-type blitzkreig invasion. That is, if anyone is still alive by that time.

 

[Rowan]

THERE IS ALLWAYS SOME GROUND COMBAT; BUT I DO SEE WHAT YOU MEAN.[dance] [dance]

 

[Sodak]

Ah, the ironclad strategy! It's very effective, particularly if you have the Lighthouse. It hasn't expired by steam engine, so your ironclads are veterans. Or SunTzu's War Academy will work, just kill any roaming units with a defense of 0 or 1, and your fleet will be invincible.

Tho' I'm not sure why you are facing musketeers... This works even better if you race thru the tech tree to steam engine before the AI even has pikemen.

That said, veteran cannon can take out musketeers behind walls, provided they don't gain other terrain bonus. It's a slower attack, but just as effective.

 

[Simon Darkshade]

This a common strategy, and the only way to effectively wage war.
With airpower, tactical and strategic, it just gets better, as it does when battleships enter play.

 

[shotdown08]

ahh the battleship~!

 

[Goatman]

Because the AI is so incompetant when it comes to naval operations, I've never really felt the need to build much of a navy at all! I tend to send in wave after wave of bombers and follow through with paratroopers.

 

[Rowan]

:crazyeyes
Yes GOATMAN the AI is certainly incompetent with Naval strategy .........
............ but hey ;that leaves a nice opening for a player who wants to do some sea battles.


[dance] [dance]

 

[Sodak]

Originally posted by Goatman
Because the AI is so incompetant when it comes to naval operations, I've never really felt the need to build much of a navy at all! I tend to send in wave after wave of bombers and follow through with paratroopers.

Ah, but that's missing the whole point of this strategy! You may never even need to research flight if you sack the whole planet by the time you have riflemen!

 

[Vlad Tepes III]

Another important point I forgot was speed. If you must commit to large scale land conquest (like taking an enemy on a large continent with little/no seaports) speed is the most important thing. Patton said "Fixed fortifications are a monument to man's stupidity" and he couldn't be more right. In my opinion a large, fast standing army is more important than fortifications.. Move through the territory with a vast, superior force, never allow them the time to set up a counterattack. Never dig in.

Anyone got any comments?

 

[Rowan]

Originally posted by Vlad Tepes III
Another important point I forgot was speed. If you must commit to large scale land conquest (like taking an enemy on a large continent with little/no seaports) speed is the most important thing. Patton said "Fixed fortifications are a monument to man's stupidity" and he couldn't be more right. In my opinion a large, fast standing army is more important than fortifications.. Move through the territory with a vast, superior force, never allow them the time to set up a counterattack. Never dig in.

Anyone got any comments?

I agree!!!!!!!!!!

[dance] [dance]

 

[SunTzu]

Someone say my name?
I love naval battles, even though the AI sucks at them. Building a huge navy with subs with nukes just fun

 

[Marko]

I love naval warfare too. Many years ago I made some naval battle scenarios where AI was quite good in island hopping..

 

[yellowsponge]

I agree that fast blitz-krieg style tactics take cities, but make sure some defensive units(rifleman for a while) are there to defend the land you conquered. in a game i was playing the enemy landed near a large city of mine with 5 artillery and 3 calvary units, along wiht a couple destroyers. i took the livberty of hiding a couple cavalry troops in the hills 2 squares away
after an exhausting attack, they took the city, and a minor advance, while their forces traveled onward, i came out of the hills and took the underdefended city, and destoryed the attackers from behind.
The lesson to be learned by this is always have something to defedn what you took, that is why Mech Inf are awesome units to have in a assault

 

[Vlad Tepes III]

Well I think its a given to leave infantry units behind to fortify new cities. Leaving a new city undefended is insane, it invites revolts and enemy attack.

What I meant was that a fast, superior land force is very important. Speed on a battlefield is essential. If I don't have sea or air support, I will delay the taking of cities and send my forces through their roads, killing any units outside of the cites.
They will usually try to send units out as a counteroffensive, Success on this battlefield is a good prelude to siege.
The long, meatgrinder seige of landlocked cities is what I hate most. SunTzu (ancient writer, not the one in these forums) said that seige was the lowest form of warfare, and I would have to agree, but in the game it is a necessity.

 

[la fayette]

Originally posted by Vlad Tepes III
Well I think its a given to leave infantry units behind to fortify new cities. Leaving a new city undefended is insane, it invites revolts and enemy attack.

Leaving a city undefended can be a very nice strategy. That city is your bait and you wish the AI to hurry towards it, either to kill it there or to strike elsewhere meanwhile.

 

[la fayette]

... or both.

 

[Darius]

I'm conflicted, because you're all right that naval war is fun, but I'm addicted to one-turn wars with 100+ howitzers in lategame; they just get the job done.

 

[Sodak]

Darius, if it's more fun to blitz with howitzers, have at it! The whole point of playing is to have fun, after all.

Maybe try one game with a blitz of 100 of some other unit, just to see how different it is. Say 100 crusaders or elephants. Or warriors!

La Fayette is right about leaving a city undefended. The AI will try to capture it back. They usually send a stream of units, you can often corner them without much difficulty.

 

[Darius]

That's the thing, though. Howitzers are no fun. I just get tempted because it's so easy. Maybe I'll just disable them in my game. :suicide:

 

[unknown_spirit]

I would love to know why the AI hates its own navy. I'd love to square up, Battleship to Battleship, but they just won't do it! Also, someone said never to dig in. Well, what do you do if you've run low on green/yellow-health units at the front? You hole them up in fortresses until you can bring up more men to continue the slaughter! Also, why does Darius use 100+ howies when he admits it's no fun? Doesn't that contradict your signature just a tad? That u shouldn't just go for strong units to kill the enemy off, or kill them off in one turn. Christ, with 100 howitzers, thats long turn....