Sneak attacks - is it all over?

[Blazer6]

I heard it was because the Dutch East Indies was off-limits to Japanese shipping, thus they were denied the resources needed to maintain their wartime economy levels.

 

[karadoc]

It is much better this way.
'Sneak attacks' are still possible, but not to that same extreme level of 'send every unit I have instantly to the tile beside the enemy capitol using their own rail system and then declare war on them'. You can still take the enemy by surprise in Civ4; but you can't completely destroy them out of the blue.

 

[guyfamous]

Ending sneak attacks was the right thing to do. It was an exploit that needed to be removed.

 

[Red Boxer]

Happens all the time. Germany in Belgium in both World Wars. Germany with Poland WW2. US with Vichy France also WW2.

Declaration of war is not compatible with modern fast/blitz wars.

Not quite. I can see what you are saying to a degree, but in no way was Ger allowed to move troops in around all of Belgium and Poland, and then start the war. Thats what the RoP-rape strategy was. It was an exploitative feature, that has been eliminated.

As simple as warfare is in Civ4 you don't need more help.

 

[gunkulator]

Actually it can be said that the United States embargo of oil and other resources is what caused the Japanese to attack the Pacific Fleet in the first place. The U.S. prevented other countries from shipping critical resources to the Japanese while they were engaged in War.

The US embargo was a response to the Japanese aggression against China and Dutch Indonesia.

To me that sounds like a very compelling reason to launch a surprise attack to cripple the Fleet that would enforce those embargos. And I can understand how the trade embargo could be considered as an act of war.

It certainly is a provocation, however one country should not be compelled to provide another with the rope that will eventually be used in its own hanging. Japan certainly knew what would happen if they attacked the Dutch colony, which not coincidently was oil-rich. The US and Great Britain acted as counter weights against total Japanese domination of east Asia, however both powers only had weak defenses in place. The embargo of July 1941 was Japan's Gulf of Tonkin - an excuse for an attack.

Back to Civ. One of the things I miss from Civ2 is sneak attacks, i.e. a bonus for the attacker in the first round of war. During the first round, attackers should not only get an attack bonus, they should be able to use roads as well. Obviously, the bonus would only be available once per game. Once you sneak attack, your neighbors would be ever-vigilant.

 

[Siggy19]

The one time that this annoyed me was when I decided to attack Mansa Musa... he had a city two squares inside his border and so I marched my army up to the border and then, on the next move, I moved that one square in so I was ready to start taking his city. Unfortunately, I didn't realise that I had an Open Borders agreement with him and so this did not start the war. I had to do that actively and then my army was moved back outside his border... basically wasting my turn.

 

[White Elk]

I never used the ROP exploit to position units for an attack. I like to roleplay my games somewhat, and the ROP exploit was far too unrealistic and unchallenging to be fun. But I loved to spring sneak attacks and Blitzkriegs on the enemy. I would gear up and position units appropriatly and then Wham!! I'd hit their border cities with my force and go as deep as possible. And sometimes I'd take a coastal border city and immediatly bring in transports loaded with units that would blitz deep into enemy terratory. It was a challenge to see how many cities I could take during the intitial phase of the assault. And it was fun. And none of it involved breaking an ROP agreement.

I do miss the Civ3 Blitzkrieg. But for the most part.. I think its a good thing that Blitzkriegs aren't as frequent as they were in Civ3. The ROP exploit didn't effect me but for the AI sneak attack. And I'm very happy to not have to track every unit that travels through my terratories. It was a pain in the arse having to follow those units around in case of treachery. So I'm very happy with the changes. But for some games I may add movement to some certain units (Cavalry, Armour) to allow for more blitzing. I enjoyed attacking with the blitz and I enjoyed defending against it.

 

[TylerDurdon]

Sneak attacks still there... but its less obvious! You can fill up to 10 transports with marines, position yourself, declare war and capture all harbor cities in turn 1!!!! I've capture a whole Island of 6 cities like this... killing of americans that had escaped there hundred of years ago when some wannabe empire needed a little more room to breath ... Somehow its a sneak attack....

I'm sure there's other tactics that can do the job for you!!! you need just a little more creativity.... and thats great!!!

 

[Bushface]

Fortunately, Spies don't get expelled from enemy lands when war starts - after all, they are invisible except to other Spies. Sometimes my Spies can use enemy roads/rails, sometimes they can't (AI inconsistency, I'm afraid); what does amuse me is that one of my enemies has Airports in all his major cities and my spies can get themselves airlifted from one to another. I don't know, of course, if this affects his airlift capability for that turn, nor if he has used it before my spy does. And what joy it is to ruin his production plans by sabotaging his only oil well, which is good value at 200gold per time.

 

[White Elk]

The US embargo was a response to the Japanese aggression against China and Dutch Indonesia.

Indeed. But I do believe that if the U.S. had not intervened, the Japanese would not have attacked Pearl Harbor. Since the U.S. did intervene; the attack on the Pacific Fleet should have been expected, and we should have been better prepared for it. It should not have come as a surprise. And yes we had to intervene as we had obligations in the region. Additionally the U.S. was compelled to get involved because of it's strategic interests in Asia.

Back to Civ. One of the things I miss from Civ2 is sneak attacks, i.e. a bonus for the attacker in the first round of war. During the first round, attackers should not only get an attack bonus, they should be able to use roads as well. Obviously, the bonus would only be available once per game. Once you sneak attack, your neighbors would be ever-vigilant.

Agreed. The attacker should enjoy one round of initiative. And I think the use of enemy roads should be possible throughout the game. This would allow for the Blitzkrieg and it would force the defender to strategically pillage roads to slow an advance. So it would allow another level of strategy that a defender could employ. But I don't think using an enemy rail system should be possible.

 

[White Elk]

You can fill up to 10 transports with marines, position yourself, declare war and capture all harbor cities in turn 1!!!!

All units can attack amphibiously, but they will suffer a penalty. Even so I've been successfull with amphibious attacks using Armor vs Infantry. And Mech Infantry can gain the amphibious promotion.

 

[TylerDurdon]

All units can attack amphibiously, but they will suffer a penalty. Even so I've been successfull with amphibious attacks using Armor vs Infantry. And Mech Infantry can gain the amphibious promotion.

Actually... my fleet was with mixed unit (Tank, Marines and 2 mech unit/7 transport). I know that every unit can be amphibious... but usually I feel like I need a GOOD tech advantage to do so!!!

Like u mentionned Tank vs Infantry is a good bet... but any other in the early ages is kinda dangerous IMO. Even Maceman vs Archer can be tricky!!! with all the defense bonus plus the amphibious minus... it hard to consider attacking this way.... maybe Im too prudent for my own good... but I like having the odds on my side!!!

 

[Zhahz]

Properly executed Amphibious Assaults make great surprise attacks.

Exactly. You can still strike fast either due to strategy or circumstance (like your culture pushing your border right up to an enemy city such that you can attack it immediately after declaring).

What's gone is the cheese, and it's a good thing.

 

[Seven05]

As the attacker without a prior declaration of war you already have an advantage, you get to chose when and where you attack and the defender won't be able to respond until the next turn. In many games the defender's first reaction is simply moving a few units around without counter-attacking.

I, for one, am happy that you can't use open borders to stage empire-wide attacks. It means that as a defender you can focus on defending your borders and they (player or AI) can't ignore them completely. You can move beyond border defenders but they still have the option of using them to attack you as you pass.

All this means is that a "sneak attack" in Civ4 is an attack without a prior declaration of war. You can still position your units for multiple attacks on the first turn of war and you can still gain a substantial advantage from it. If you think this isn't the case just pick a random civ in your current game and declare war on them without first moving your units into position.

 

[KingCruz]

I think if you can declare war and attack the opponent all in one turn, then it's considered a "sneak attack"

As for open borders pushing back enemies when war is declared, I'd rather sacrafice realism for balance. Why have ROP? Can you really trust someone else with ROP on multiplayer?

 

[Big J Money]

I'm not complaining or anything, because part of what makes Civ IV so beautiful are the places where it is simple, but I still kinda wish that they at least allowed the player ONE good sneak attack. In other words, if you have 5 armies camped outside 5 cities and then attacked one of those cities (without declaring war first), you would be able to actually attack the city immediately, but your other 4 armies would still get teleported outside the now enemy country. One sneak attack is certainly not ROP-rape. It's realistic, but it also seems to be a very reasonable tactic, gameplay wise. I also wish there were two levels of Open Borders: 1) Trade and 2) Military. Trade would only allow things like workers, settlers, missionaries, etc inside the country.

=$= Big J Money =$=

 

[White Elk]

Like u mentionned Tank vs Infantry is a good bet... but any other in the early ages is kinda dangerous IMO. Even Maceman vs Archer can be tricky!!! with all the defense bonus plus the amphibious minus... it hard to consider attacking this way.... maybe Im too prudent for my own good... but I like having the odds on my side!!!

I've still lost a number of armor with these amphibious attacks but the odds have been good enough that it's been worth repeating. Though I should also mention that I soften the defenders with airstrikes when I can. But there isn't always many aircraft left over after reducing the city defenses during a surprise attack. Unless I've had plenty of time to prepare.

I've yet to make any amphibious assaults before having marines and armor. I'm still waiting for the oppurtunity. But like you I'm prudent and will probably have to have some high motivation for doing so. Seems like an early amphib assault would be very costly. And there would be no air support to weaken the units. And it would take alot of Frigates to reduce the city defenses.

Hopefully the expansion pack will have an amphibious Viking!

 

[Volstag]

Unless they've created some awesome transportation weapon, or I stepped into a wormhole, is this a major change to how war is declared and fought in the game?

If so, it's a shame.

Until you end up in an MP game and your "friend" captures multiple cities in the same turn.

As others have mentioned, it's to prevent ROP abuse. When dealing with the AI, simply position your troops on their borders, declare war, and march on your objectives. Incidentally, it's not possible to "surprise" any AI in any game.

 

[Volstag]

I, for one, am happy that you can't use open borders to stage empire-wide attacks.

Ditto. Not only that, but I think it's somewhat unrealistic (I use the term loosely) to expect otherwise. I can't think of a single country that wouldn't be concerned by huge encampments of "friendly forces" outside each major city they own. Just a wee bit suspicious.

 

[Seven05]

I've yet to make any amphibious assaults before having marines and armor. I'm still waiting for the oppurtunity. But like you I'm prudent and will probably have to have some high motivation for doing so. Seems like an early amphib assault would be very costly.

What has worked for me is to either target weak cities with few defenders or to not perform a "true" amphibious assault. Instead of hitting the city directly from the transports I'll move in a smaller force of defensive units and land them in a good defensive tile (hill or forrest will do), sometimes several small groups of 3-6 units. The next turn the defender will frequently send units out to attack my new arrivals reducing the number of city defenders they have. That lets me move in with my main attack on the following turn taking a weaker city with fewer defenders or landing next to it and not having to deal with a counter-attack hitting my main force and delaying them while they heal.

Another option is to bring extra catapults or cannons and use them first, even though they will lose the attack they will still inflict collateral damage to the other defenders. Unfortunately this normally ends up requiring a lot of extra units and ships to transport them.

If all else fails I'll try to land in a friendly empire and then launch the attack from there.