Naval units - What's the point?

Rohili

King
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
727
There are so many naval units in Civ 3 that it's astounding. However, I find the uses of them rather limited, especially these:

Ironclads
Cruiser
Aegis Cruiser
Submarine
Nuclear Submarine (why go to so much trouble when you can just build ICBMs)

Most of these naval units come at a late age where airports and railroads diminish the need for naval transportation, and you can't use them to capture cities. For bombardment, you can do much better with bombers. Their only main usage is to fight other naval units, and they are low priority anyway.

So, am I missing something or are they really pointless?
 
Rohili said:
There are so many naval units in Civ 3 that it's astounding. However, I find the uses of them rather limited, especially these:

Ironclads
Cruiser
Aegis Cruiser
Submarine
Nuclear Submarine (why go to so much trouble when you can just build ICBMs)

Most of these naval units come at a late age where airports and railroads diminish the need for naval transportation, and you can't use them to capture cities. For bombardment, you can do much better with bombers. Their only main usage is to fight other naval units, and they are low priority anyway.

So, am I missing something or are they really pointless?

if you have the superior navy you can't be invaded from the sea. But yeah, I hardly build any navy.
 
Shame, it would be nice to have more purpose for navy. Plus it's so much pain in the a** to set up amphib war, if you don't have transports and you have to do everything with Galleons, which can carry up to 4 unit. Click, click clickety click...
 
ICBMs take a very long time to build. Much easier to build a nuke sub w/tac nuke.
 
ICBMs take a very long time to build. Much easier to build a nuke sub w/tac nuke.

Agree with that.

Naval units are also useful on maps with loads of water.
 
ICBMs take a very long time to build. Much easier to build a nuke sub w/tac nuke.
Only on small distances. Submarines move too slowly,and,i think,faster build the ICBM.
 
Yeah, but in my game, the British are denying my superior army from landing by way of their navy. Their navy is 10X larger than mine, and it is shelling my coasts apart. Just annoying.
 
In my last game, I destroyed the Hebrews w/o landing a single unit on their continent, by firing 60+ ICBM at them.
 
I've modded my game not to include the industrial or modern eras (industrial replaced by the Age of Sail), but I think I can still say that the main power of naval units will only become apparent on island maps. If you can create a superior navy before anyone else, you can effectively deny every other nation the possibility of spreading their civilization outside their home islands. And when you finally attack them, taking over the other civs island by island, and they send out their ships, you can take them out easily if you always have several of your own ships surrounding the enemy islands.

Most often, I play with the English, and thus I have Man-o-Wars and privateers surrounding every other island. If I'm at war with them, I attack all of their ships with Man-o-Wars, thus expanding my fleet (enslavement) and if I'm not at war, I sink them selectively (taking out the weakest) with my privateers, thus expanding my privateer fleet.
 
Hmm i like your style. But I usually do not build a navy until i get Destroyers and Cruisers. I use my cruisers to bombard coastlines and then i send in Marines to finish the job, also a 2 or 3 tanks to keep reinforcements from arriving and retaking the city.
 
I usually play on maps with lots of islands so navy is important to me in 3 ways

1: to protect my transport ships from AI navy

2: Defend my coastline from enemy invasions

3: Bombardment
 
I play on high water continent or arch. maps, so navy is a big deal. In a pangea game I could see how they would be nearly useless. With a lot of islands and the AI sailing all around though, it's a big deal to have a big navy! I also especially like the Lighthouse and seafaring on such maps because that gives you +1 movement from both. There's another wonder that gives you +1 movement too...thats one FAST Galleon then! :O


Joshua
 
Am playing on large map: continents with 70% water. Triremes (sp.) have helped me transport units a bit further (captured the Great Lighthouse from Portugese) and I sunk a few enemy vessels in my territory using them.

(Keeping in mind you can load and unload units in cities without using movement points) Its a godd idea to keep at least one of them operating early on, when the opprtunity presents itself but I guess you could get away without it.

Later on, (depending on situation) its a different story, and I find a navy to be important. My naval battle skill has also improved with practice, and that helps you win.

I had a scenario once against the Zulus on a panagea, and they didn't appear to build ANY navy - not one! I already had them pinned down with my cavalry, cut off by frigates and blockaded with brave privateers, so I reasearched Ironclads, and that was the clincher. Although I already had them on the run, it helped me seal the deal.

Gov was communism and difficulty at emperor.
 
CoolioVonHoolio said:
I usually play on maps with lots of islands so navy is important to me in 3 ways

1: to protect my transport ships from AI navy

2: Defend my coastline from enemy invasions

3: Bombardment

Hit the nail on the head.

Navies are also fun to have and use no? I love naval battles when they arise. Even though I realise that these are largely insignificant to the continental battles where the real power shifts take place, these huge naval collisions all add a bit of drama and that ain't a bad thing.
 
The problem is that they can't be upgraded. It's close to reality, but it makes them less valuable.
 
Back
Top Bottom