Point of Precision Strike?

[MrBiggBoy]

Yes, well I think Precision Strike is perfectly useless. Who wants to kill improvements? When I take a city I want barracks, harbour, airport, temple, etc. left intact. Any points against?

 

[Tassadar]

I like to do precision bombing on big a.i city.

1.- destroy harbor= no more veteran shipe
2.- destroy temple, cathedral, markeplace= civil disorder
3.- destroy barrack= no heal, no veteran units.
4.- destroy factory and coal plant= stop a.i. from polluting the world and cut there productivity.
5.- destroy airport= no veteran fighter, no airlift

So there a lot of good use for precision strike over a powerful a.i. In one of my game i did it only to stop them polluting the world.

 

[MrBiggBoy]

yeah, but when i'm at war, i have 1 objective: annihilate them. for my purposes, it sucks. why did i post this thread anyways??

 

[Ohwell]

When you capture a city all happiness improvements and most other improvements are destroyed anyway.

 

[Tassadar]

If you are strong enough to annihilate them i agree with you, its better to use regular bombing to soften defender ( if needed)

 

[rangers85]

Originally posted by Tassadar
I like to do precision bombing on big a.i city.

1.- destroy harbor= no more veteran shipe
2.- destroy temple, cathedral, markeplace= civil disorder
3.- destroy barrack= no heal, no veteran units.
4.- destroy factory and coal plant= stop a.i. from polluting the world and cut there productivity.
5.- destroy airport= no veteran fighter, no airlift

So there a lot of good use for precision strike over a powerful a.i. In one of my game i did it only to stop them polluting the world.

Also, if you destroy their harbor, that also means you'll starve the city, since it'll usually be working the coastal tiles for the extra food.

 

[Tassadar]

Originally posted by rangers85


Also, if you destroy their harbor, that also means you'll starve the city, since it'll usually be working the coastal tiles for the extra food.

Yes i agree i like to do that to a size 12 a.i. city on a tundra peninsula surrounded by water. it will starve very quick without harbor.

 

[Marcus Magnus]

I use precision bombing to screw up the enemy internally. It's fun to watch his cities go up in smoke!

 

[Maple]

I use precision bombing to get rid of things that I dont like in their larger cities like barracks, temples, cathedrals, etc

I also used pb once when the comp was close to a cultural victory. I bombed cathedrals, temples, marketplaces, etc

 

[antisocialgeek]

If you want to make use of some strategy whatsoever you would make use of the precision strike. Instead of invasion some prefer to wage complete ariel assault against an opponent. Aircraft Carrier X2. One carrier complete with air defense while another concentrates on the airstrikes. Simply spank the enemy into submission until they want to end the conflict. I see no use in sacrifices my marine units unless I have to. (i.e. foreign enemy chooses to launch a nuclear strike against my cities). This action would constitute a full out invasion and total capitulation by the enemy. War ravages and breeds discontent. If I could destroy the main infrastructure of the enemy it would prevent them from rebuilding their war producing machine, industry. No harbors, airports, no trade, no income, no support for strong units. The can continue to fight but will choose to end the conflict when they are not winning.

 

[Maple]

Excellent first post! :jump:

 

[sgrig]

It would be cool if you could decide whether precision bombing is to target buildings, population or units inside city!

 

[LaRo]

With the tech "satellite" and "laser", we should be able to do precision strike of cruise missile.

Of course, cruise missile like all flying unit need a extended range.

 

[TheDS]

All culture producing improvements (except GWs) are destroyed if you take over a city. This includes Temple, Cathedral, and Colloseum, which just happen to be your happyizers. You may as well whack happyizers, and on the next turn, when there is unrest, hit them with propaganda. It should be cheaper and maybe more successful.

If you're really nasty, whack the happyizers in all their cities and force them into anarchy. It should be a little easier to assimiate them, or at least to buy them (propaganda).

If it's a city you can't get to in the next few turns, whacking the barracks to prevent enemy unit healing is critical if your invasion force is small.

I've never gotten to the point when I can make precision strikes, so I don't know for sure what you're allowed to do. But if it's allowed, I would probably use them against units almost exclusively.

 

[The Last Conformist]

Simply spank the enemy into submission until they want to end the conflict.

In my experience that doesn't work. At one occasions I had a fleet of Ironclads bombarding the Romans for the better part of a century - reducing a size 12 and one size 7 city to size 1, killing all improvments in them, destroying all roads, mines and irrigations along the coast and keeping the defenders at one HP for most of the time. The Romans refused to speak for me during all that time - all I had done to them earlier was capturing a city they'd placed on my continent, in a war they started.

(For the record, the Ironclads were eventually sunk by the Egyptians, who subsequently reduced the Romans to two cities. Since the Romans still refused to talk to me, I took those two cities to use as bases for operations against the Egyptians.)