1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Modern warfare

Discussion in 'Civ3 - Strategy & Tips' started by Lynx, Oct 20, 2002.

  1. Lynx

    Lynx Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
    Messages:
    520
    Location:
    ...
    Modern warfare in civ 3 can be quite a frustrating experience, since the gameplay changes entirely, but i have played games and found some unique ideas that work in Industrial and Modern age wars.

    At the begenning of the industrial age, Riflemen suddnely make a great deal of units obsolete and is the first unit that shows the signs that charging on cities will not work. One of my games I sent 10 Vetrean Riflemen into a city with 1 regular rifleman, I lost 7 of those riflemen and the 8th one was in the red. This can be irritating and can get people to say " this is bull@#$%, " but in reality this is extremely accurate because at this point its trench warfare, not open fields where you can send thousands against a few and still lose because of defenses.

    But what can be used against these kind of defenses? Cavalry are ok against Riflemen, but still have issues. When you get infantry, it gets much worse and only the tank will be able to defeat the Infantry regularly. The key for wars may be different, but most of the time it is for pure expansion. if that is the case, there are much better ways to wage a WW1 style war. Artillery pieces become probably your best tool, if not cavalry. Artillery can fire on roads and key recources while cavalry can rush past lines, pillaging all they see. Your opponent may see this and kill your cavalry and artillery despite guards, but these blows are worse and can get a country bankrupt really fast if used effectively. I played a game in the modern age when i stormed a enemy city with tanks(I had no cities nearby, i was passing through allied territory), only to load it with paratroopers and land all across theyre land (I had helicopters to lift them). Once helicopters are in the war and you have stormed an enemy city, you will have the upper hand by taking the opponents economy while yours is probably unthreatened.

    While wars can be controlled through these quick attacks and pillages on the enemy's economy, you still wont prove your point to the AI, (in play the world, I expect that a human player would want to surrender if they saw their economy sent straight to @#$%). How do you prove your point and take the " impenetrable " cities? Artillery and Air Raids are this answer, although air is a bit less effective for it (better for pillaging), they still help take enemy HP down then you can make a frontal attack while they are weak.

    As far as the navy is concerned, you probably wont have mass naval battles, and the ones you come across wont be against fortified bases, so you can ultimately prevail/lose a sea war, which can be a key for the war. on cross-continent wars the sea is the most important area of war. Your goal is to guard every transport you have going to the enemy shores, and to harrass enemy shores.

    On cross-continent invasions lots of people land theyre men as soon as they get there...BAD. you should wait until lyour whole force is collected for you to make a strike on an opponents shore, a quick landing can lead to bieng surrounded, your goals for the assault are to secure at least 1 city where you can ship in forces by loading it with units, then when resistance is gone, force building an airport, form there your true invasion can begin...

    Perhaps these quick tips can help some people in their quest to become a master of modern warfare in civ 3.
     
  2. ThePrankMonkey

    ThePrankMonkey mowing em' down!

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2002
    Messages:
    702
    in my latest game i took out england, persia babylon and zulu, the germans and chinese were extreminated by those i extreminated there is only civ left, india. india is also in the modern age but there is a huge frigging difference between their miltary force and mine. RUBBER. i own all the rubber on the map and they cant even make infantry, artillery, Mech. inf., moderm armor, no tanks, no ground forces that pose a threat to me at all, at best they can make a big navy and air force, since both have limited range their only alternative is nuclear weapons and i cans top that in a BIG hurry. since they are the only civ left i dont have to worry about other civs delcaring war on me if i nuke ghandi back to the stone age. india has 17 mech. inf. and i have 140 mech inf. they have NO tanks, i have about 100 MA. why not just invade them you ask? because i like to let them come to me, letting them commit and stretch their forces out before i even make a move against them. the best they can build is a cruise missle and of course they didnt use them correctly in the last war against me.

    he who control the rubber controls the war. hard to take cavalry and riflemen against MI and MA.


    rubber is easy to control, it never runs out so you never have to worry about it moving into an enemy civ's territory.

    i have india by the short and curlies:goodjob: :lol:
     
  3. Lynx

    Lynx Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
    Messages:
    520
    Location:
    ...
    There are also those kinds of wars, but I was merely tyring to make ease assuming your opponent was well stockpiled with recources and was fully mobilized for war. Defense is reasonably easy, especially if you make fortifications along borders and put men in them with no way around it (the french maginot line is NOT a good example) and you can hold against an opponent. But I can see why someone would fight a defensive war, I myself like to at some times when i never wanted war to begin with. This was written to give some tips about attacking, you can do whatever you want, but some things are more efficient than others.

    P.S. if you are on a planet with 2 nations, nuke them as much as you want, see if you can beat WW2's death toll (approx. 60 Million):nuke:
     
  4. Yzman

    Yzman Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Messages:
    2,692
    Location:
    Illinois, USA
    The best strategy is never try to take the cities full on. Reduce ALL defenders in the city to 1 hp with artillery and then attack, you will win the majority of the time. This will also provide mimimum losses.
     
  5. Sgt.Hellfish

    Sgt.Hellfish King of the Oceans

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2002
    Messages:
    1,672
    Location:
    Manchester, England
    My best plan is build a massive navy with Battleships and Aircraft carriers. then get a load of transports full of infantry and other troops/units bomb all roads leading out of the shoreline cities and move the transports in. Planes can be used to defend as well, e.g. a tank moves on ur new city u send ur bombers onto the tank reducing it to 1hp which u destroy with whoever was garisoned in the city.:tank:
     
  6. Lynx

    Lynx Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
    Messages:
    520
    Location:
    ...
    Good Ideas, as they naturally work every time.
     
  7. Arrian

    Arrian Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    276
    Location:
    Middletown, CT, USA
    Cavalry will take down riflemen just fine if you have enough of them and don't mind some casualties. It's a fair fight, essentially: a 6 attack vs. a 6 (modified for fortification and terrain bonuses) defense. Obviously, cities (7-12 pop) will hurt.

    Cav/Infantry vs. Infantry is brutal, and requires quite a bit of artillery support. It can be done, but it's slow and painful.

    I try to do most of my fighting prior to the AI's discovery of nationalism. After that I may use my Cavalry against a poor and weak civ, but will wait for Tanks to take on a stronger one.

    Also keep in mind the "nutcracker" power of armies. Armies full of Tanks will crack open cities defended by infantry pretty easily.

    -Arrian
     
  8. Sukenis

    Sukenis the J'BOOtian Warlord

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2001
    Messages:
    461
    Location:
    Southeast Missouri
    In my humble opinion, after nationalis war are different but still easy to wage. March around a stack of Rifelmen/cannons or Infentry/artilery and you are set. Since the AI does not handle bombardment well you can crush a city with 1-4 rounds of bombing and then send in your men. The primary difference is that until tanks come along, fast units are not the key. Having the firepower of cannons/artilery is what matters (with there 1 movement). Fight wars between Riflemen and tanks is simply this.
     
  9. Woody

    Woody General

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2001
    Messages:
    439
    Once you reach the modern age build nothing but modern armor. They are fast and the losses you take by not waiting on bombard units is more than made up for by sheer numbers of them you can have by producing them exclusively.
     
  10. Tassadar

    Tassadar Master

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2002
    Messages:
    3,171
    I like to use lots of bomber in carrier and marines amphibious attack. 1-2 hp infantry are easily kill by marines. raze city and no more troops in enemy cultural border ( war weariness under republic or democraty).
     
  11. Crow T Robot

    Crow T Robot Minister of Hedonism

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2002
    Messages:
    171
    I've never found Armies to be particularly effective, esp the way the AI uses them.

    That 'set' of 3 tanks will only engage 1 or 2 defenders (depending on movement made that turn), where as 3 separate tanks, they would have 3 or 6 (again depending on movement).

    Where they can be effective is versus a superior force, ie an Army of 3 tanks versus the only or last MA or MI in a city. With the MA/MI gone the lesser units can duke it out but arty would do almost as well and possibly lead to some GLs. But thats not how they tend to use them.
     
  12. Lynx

    Lynx Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
    Messages:
    520
    Location:
    ...
    which is why you use combined arms, mass something only is effective if you outnumber your opponenet 10 to 1 and/or ur massin modern armors. and Tanks may crack infantry, theyt still will have issues, but fewer than most...
     
  13. Random Passerby

    Random Passerby Bystander

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2002
    Messages:
    95
    There are basically 2 approaches to modern wars of conquest, as I see it: combined arms and blitzes of obscene proportions.

    1. Combined Arms: Build infantry, artillery, and tanks in proportions of roughly 2:2:1. Send grounds of infantry into the most defensible border positions with minimal artillery support; if the enemy doesn't knock them off, dig in and bring up the bulk of your artillery (preferably workers too; for a lengthy siege you may want to fortress your units, and you will DEFINITELY want a road under them if there isn't one to begin with). Pound your objective into rubble, then when the defenders are softened have your tanks punch through and take the city. Use the territory you gain, hopefully with railroads or at the very least roads, to have a group of infantry leapfrog to the next assault point(s), and repeat the process (leaving a rear guard to clamp down on the captured city, which will probably eventually become the spearhead of the next drive down the line).

    Pros: Your main assault force is practically invincible; you can often size 25 cities defended with half a dozen veteran infantry with no losses. Most of the units involved can be built early in the game and upgraded. Actually feels vaguely like fighting the way an actual war is fought.

    Cons: Takes a long time. The gain you get from having an invincible main assault stack is illusory, because you lose units elsewhere to attrition each turn and it takes lots of turns to conquer any sizeable stretch of territory.

    2. Blitz of obscene proportions: Build lots of tanks/modern armor. Drive them into things all at once. Vroom. Bang.

    Pros: Level entire continents in a couple turns.

    Cons: Painfully unrealistic. Costs a lot of shields in lost armor, although still very cost-effective overall.

    Both require hefty initial investment, but given the fact that the only real con with the latter method is that it feels silly, I think it's pretty clear which one is better if you just want to win.
     
  14. Rammstein

    Rammstein Barely hominid

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2002
    Messages:
    345
    Location:
    Sweden
    This is old news and most of you might know about it already, but it's really really cool. Since all trade moves through the capital, to completely eradicate your opponent's capability to wage war with modern units, all you have to do is remove all roads surrounding the capitol, and then wait until the very last to take it. This way, all your enemy can do is produce ancient units that won't stand a chance against your modern armor...

    I build 16 warriors expressly for this purpose when fighting the Germans. I had a ROP with them and could place all my warriors around his capital and move all my forces to the right locations, and then I wiped them out in four turns. Not one modern unit met my forces.
     
  15. Lynx

    Lynx Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
    Messages:
    520
    Location:
    ...
    that...could also work, but what if youre opponent has a massive empire? you have to set your goals. not everything can be accompished with just one action.
     
  16. Lynx

    Lynx Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
    Messages:
    520
    Location:
    ...
    I attached a save game to this, as a good example of a modern age war. I play the Americans or Terran Dominion (I like Starcraft), Its 1954 and france has a guy in your land, they will attack if you tell them to get out, or they will attack if u surround the unit. There are several pacts, and america has pacts with almost everyone. america however DOES NOT have aluminum and has severe production problems with a navy. ( this was my first game that i finished, so its on cheiftain, and i really sucked, you will probably spend alot of time disbanding units and fixing the economy and stuff like it, but overall there are few other problems).
     

    Attached Files:

  17. Rammstein

    Rammstein Barely hominid

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2002
    Messages:
    345
    Location:
    Sweden
    Lynx -> Yes well, of course this is just one part of the strategy... an important part, but still... And I was a great deal more powerful than the Germans in this game. But it is a great way to open up a war, you have a great chance of really wiping out his forces quickly.
     
  18. Yzman

    Yzman Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Messages:
    2,692
    Location:
    Illinois, USA

    Not necessarly. That would only be if they are trading for the resources. As long as a city is attached to a resource it can use it, regardless or being attached to the capital or not.
     
  19. Lynx

    Lynx Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
    Messages:
    520
    Location:
    ...
    It works, But you also have to figure out that to make a pillage attack work, you have to take at least one of their cities if they are far from your borders, otherwise drop the troops and let the looting and burning begin!:D
     
  20. Sgt.Hellfish

    Sgt.Hellfish King of the Oceans

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2002
    Messages:
    1,672
    Location:
    Manchester, England
    just burn the cities then they dont get anything
     

Share This Page