Tank Beeline: The new dominant beeline in BtS?

[futurehermit]

In Vanilla and Warlords my sense is the dominant beeline was for cavalry. They really had no counter, moved fast, and could take cities effectively.

Now cav have been pushed back making them less attractive and the odds much more likely that the AI will be getting to rifling in time to counter your cav rush at some point.

Cuirrasiers are ok but are not a dominant unit really.

Now, my one complaint so far with BtS is that the AI techs too slow.

So, the strat I've been using with success is semi-beelining (I think it would be possible to do a harder beeline) for tanks (I like adding gunships and bombers as well although gunships are probably overkill...tanks and bombers make a nice combo if you hit it early enough).

Basically, my approach is build and/or conquer a reasonably large empire 15+/- cities. Then head up to tanks stopping along the way for techs you need (e.g., bio, pp, etc.) to boost your empire.

Once you have tanks and a number of the AI are backwards in tech then you go on a conquering rampage. Tanks are strong, fast, get city raider promotions, and have no counter as long as the AI is not at tech parity.

I won a very comfortable domination victory with the Mayans taking this approach and was very pleased. But I think any victory really is possible using this approach.

Thoughts?

 

[axident]

In Vanilla and Warlords my sense is the dominant beeline was for cavalry. They really had no counter, moved fast, and could take cities effectively.

Now cav have been pushed back making them less attractive and the odds much more likely that the AI will be getting to rifling in time to counter your cav rush at some point.

Cuirrasiers are ok but are not a dominant unit really.

Now, my one complaint so far with BtS is that the AI techs too slow.

So, the strat I've been using with success is semi-beelining (I think it would be possible to do a harder beeline) for tanks (I like adding gunships and bombers as well although gunships are probably overkill...tanks and bombers make a nice combo if you hit it early enough).

Basically, my approach is build and/or conquer a reasonably large empire 15+/- cities. Then head up to tanks stopping along the way for techs you need (e.g., bio, pp, etc.) to boost your empire.

Once you have tanks and a number of the AI are backwards in tech then you go on a conquering rampage. Tanks are strong, fast, get city raider promotions, and have no counter as long as the AI is not at tech parity.

I won a very comfortable domination victory with the Mayans taking this approach and was very pleased. But I think any victory really is possible using this approach.

Thoughts?

Cavs still rock if you can incite enough wars among the AI and boost your own research through various methods; you only need what, a couple of dozen turns to conquer half of a standard-sized map with them? Even if someone gets rifles, if he JUST got them he won't have enough rifles to counter your swarm. I used them vs. cuirassiers, muskets, longbows, and pikes until my tanks rolled out, which made things even more uneven. Someone finally got grenadiers but my tanks were already up and running by then. I got bombers shortly before the end of the game: Monarch/Standard/Normal 120450 score 1785 Domination. I didn't know pop was so tied into score else I'd have gone for Bio sooner and farmed more. I also was conquering so quickly with cavs and tanks that I gained more points per turn from captured cities than I lost per turn to time.

P.S. Mass airships supporting cavs can probably handle several rifles per turn, albeit not mass rifles. Having a destroyer or at least a frigate bombard coastal cities also cuts down on cav losses. Cavs can also withdraw.

 

[ds61514]

For space race, going rifles + cannons is probably better. Faster massing = more time for conquered cities to help your empire. Very rarely in my Emp games (I think once) has the AI massed grenadiers in response. Usually its just wave after wave of cuirassiers

 

[InvisibleStalke]

If you are fighting tanks vs an enemy without tanks or artillery then you are really a tech era ahead - and any battle in which you are a tech era ahead is devastating. But if you have tanks that early, you must also have had infantry well before the AI - and at that point infantry would have no counter either.

A rifle beeline is pretty devastating too - grenadiers are now off the beaten path and rifles vs longbows is probably the biggest jump in the game.

I think the nice thing now is that liberalism isn't necessary the main focus for a mid game rush. You have to gain your tech lead the hard way. And once you gain it, expect to be able to capitalize on it.

 

[axident]

If you are fighting tanks vs an enemy without tanks or artillery then you are really a tech era ahead - and any battle in which you are a tech era ahead is devastating. But if you have tanks that early, you must also have had infantry well before the AI - and at that point infantry would have no counter either.

A rifle beeline is pretty devastating too - grenadiers are now off the beaten path and rifles vs longbows is probably the biggest jump in the game.

I think the nice thing now is that liberalism isn't necessary the main focus for a mid game rush. You have to gain your tech lead the hard way. And once you gain it, expect to be able to capitalize on it.

Cavs, tanks = 2 moves. The other crap is slower and you are tempted to lug siege with them, slowing you down even more, and that's where cavs and tanks shine. Slowdown and warning = more enemy troops to destroy. So don't give them much warning and don't let them have enough time to tech to better units.

In my most recent game's replay, my empire more than doubled in size in an eyeblink. Give me a few dozen level-2 cavs vs enemy medieval units (Pentagon or a civic), and a broad-enough front, and I can conquer 10 cities (Monarch/Std/Normal) in 10 turns--without many casualties, either. Let's see you do that with 1-move units. Back up your cavs with airships for a smoother ride.

 

[frob2900]

I would have thought that with Anti-Tank units avaiable you would need an even greater tech lead than in Warlords to make tank spam assaults a winning move?

Personally I like the idea of drill riflemen/infantry+cavalry+cannons/artillery.

The introduction of drill as a gunpowder promotion makes rifle/infantry SoDs less vulnerable to artillery/cannons and cavalry flank attacks lessen the danger from artillery stacks.

Add a medic 3/woodsman III warlord to your stack and the collateral damage problem becomes even less.

 

[madscientist]

I played huge maps in warlords so I almost always beelined to tanks, either for a space race or domination. Really hard to conquer enough land with cavalry on huge maps, warlords or BTS.

That said, my second BTS victory was as Zara using a prolonged cavalry rush and upgraded Oromos to riflemen to claim enough population to get 60% of the vote for a backdoor diplo victory (I beelined radio/mass media that game). In that game Frederick had a large empire on my continent, no horses, and was not up to replaceable parts. I also had physics and airships which he did not.

I think beelining physics for the free GS and airships are more important than the longer industrialization/electricity/combustion route for tanks.. There is no counter to airships until flight, and with nerfed cannons/trebs airships do alot of the work now. Cannons or spies to bring defense to 0% bomb units with airships, invade with whatever land unit you have. Also if I have a choice I will usually tech combustion/flight before I tech electricity/combustion/industrialization, especially since flight opens up rocketry and artillery is nefed also (not essential to ge from cannons to artillery as it once was).

 

[futurehermit]

Cavs, tanks = 2 moves. The other crap is slower and you are tempted to lug siege with them, slowing you down even more, and that's where cavs and tanks shine. Slowdown and warning = more enemy troops to destroy. So don't give them much warning and don't let them have enough time to tech to better units.

In my most recent game's replay, my empire more than doubled in size in an eyeblink. Give me a few dozen level-2 cavs vs enemy medieval units (Pentagon or a civic), and a broad-enough front, and I can conquer 10 cities (Monarch/Std/Normal) in 10 turns--without many casualties, either. Let's see you do that with 1-move units. Back up your cavs with airships for a smoother ride.

Agree 100% Fast moving units ftw. I guess I could still consider a cav beeline. I will have to try it out and see how it goes.

 

[frob2900]

Agree 100% Fast moving units ftw. I guess I could still consider a cav beeline. I will have to try it out and see how it goes.

Is this due to the fact that the AI techrate is slower, so you can get a military tech edge?

I haven't played much BtS, but from Warlords I got the feeling that move 2 units are always less powerful than a stack of similar tech level move 1 units, e.g. cavs v. rifles, knights v. pikes. With the Cav beeline nerfed I was expecting this to hold even more in BtS, so I am surprised by these considerations.

 

[madscientist]

Is this due to the fact that the AI techrate is slower, so you can get a military tech edge?

I haven't played much BtS, but from Warlords I got the feeling that move 2 units are always less powerful than a stack of similar tech level move 1 units, e.g. cavs v. rifles, knights v. pikes. With the Cav beeline nerfed I was expecting this to hold even more in BtS, so I am surprised by these considerations.

Because of the slower techrate in BTS, once you have cavalry and rifles (come at the same time assuming you tech military tradition for crussairs before rifling) you have that advantage for a much longer time. It takes longer to get cavalry but the advantage seams to last longer.

 

[frob2900]

Because of the slower techrate in BTS, once you have cavalry and rifles (come at the same time assuming you tech military tradition for crussairs before rifling) you have that advantage for a much longer time. It takes longer to get cavalry but the advantage seams to last longer.

You're saying it's generally possible to run cavalry vs. medieval units longer in BtS? What difficulty level? Wasn't the nerf supposed to stop that??

 

[madscientist]

You're saying it's generally possible to run cavalry vs. medieval units longer in BtS? What difficulty level? Wasn't the nerf supposed to stop that??

Yes, it is now more difficult for a slower teching AI to get the units to counter cavalry (exception if they take physics route for airships, but airships do not do enough on defense). My BTS games were on Prince level which is what I played in warlords but is more like warlords nobel level. I am now playing on Monarch in BTS which seams more balanced.

I think the main reason the AIs tech slower in BTS is they build more military units and/or use the espionage slider. One defensive spy in each of your cities seams to greatly minimize AI espionage mischief.

 

[futurehermit]

@Frob: They pushed cav back, but the AI techs waaay slower now! So if you beeline cav the AI can still be way behind you giving you a strong advantage.

My reasoning on tanks is that this tech disparity is even greater. If you think cav vs. longbows is powerful, you should see tanks vs longbows

I even think that knights (esp. cataphracts) vs. longbows is a great deal if you can hit before the AI gets engineering (quite possible now) because of the 2-move.

2-move means you wipe through an enemy empire 2x as fast! If it would take you only 10 turns to go through an empire with 2-move units it would take 20 for 1-move units. That's 10 extra turns for the AI to be whipping/drafting/building units--which it does much better now frankly. So due to losses and the enemy cranking units it is much more likely that your advance will stall 2/3 of the way into your conquest if you don't bring along huge numbers of units (maintenance). Furthermore this means 10 extra turns of combatting war weariness, which later in the game has the potential to be quite crippling (before fascism).

 

[axident]

I played huge maps in warlords so I almost always beelined to tanks, either for a space race or domination. Really hard to conquer enough land with cavalry on huge maps, warlords or BTS.

That said, my second BTS victory was as Zara using a prolonged cavalry rush and upgraded Oromos to riflemen to claim enough population to get 60% of the vote for a backdoor diplo victory (I beelined radio/mass media that game). In that game Frederick had a large empire on my continent, no horses, and was not up to replaceable parts. I also had physics and airships which he did not.

I think beelining physics for the free GS and airships are more important than the longer industrialization/electricity/combustion route for tanks.. There is no counter to airships until flight, and with nerfed cannons/trebs airships do alot of the work now. Cannons or spies to bring defense to 0% bomb units with airships, invade with whatever land unit you have. Also if I have a choice I will usually tech combustion/flight before I tech electricity/combustion/industrialization, especially since flight opens up rocketry and artillery is nefed also (not essential to ge from cannons to artillery as it once was).

Good points, I forgot about spies tearing down walls as well--a great substitute for siege. Just plant them in target cities before your invasion.

 

[ds61514]

2-move means you wipe through an enemy empire 2x as fast! If it would take you only 10 turns to go through an empire with 2-move units it would take 20 for 1-move units. That's 10 extra turns for the AI to be whipping/drafting/building units--which it does much better now frankly. So due to losses and the enemy cranking units it is much more likely that your advance will stall 2/3 of the way into your conquest if you don't bring along huge numbers of units (maintenance). Furthermore this means 10 extra turns of combatting war weariness, which later in the game has the potential to be quite crippling (before fascism).

But:

1) It also takes a lot more than 10 turns to tech up to tanks and airships versus rifles and cannons. To get started with tanks, you need thousands (tens of thousands?) more beakers than the going to rifling + steel. And unlike rifles or cannons, you can't upgrade anything to tanks.
2) The AIs might tech slower, but that doesn't mean they WIN slower. Sure you might be going after an AI with longbows, meanwhile the AI on the other continent is merrily building a spaceship/culture. Thus you want their cities to be more productive for YOU as early as possible.

 

[tycoonist]

beelining for tanks is how i achieved 90% of my domination wins on monarch even on vanilla. i never really got addicted to cavs but in my opinion, tanks make the best city raiders in the game: the only fast unit (except MA) with city raider, collateral damage and blitz available. Wow.

 

[futurehermit]

But:

1) It also takes a lot more than 10 turns to tech up to tanks and airships versus rifles and cannons. To get started with tanks, you need thousands (tens of thousands?) more beakers than the going to rifling + steel. And unlike rifles or cannons, you can't upgrade anything to tanks.
2) The AIs might tech slower, but that doesn't mean they WIN slower. Sure you might be going after an AI with longbows, meanwhile the AI on the other continent is merrily building a spaceship/culture. Thus you want their cities to be more productive for YOU as early as possible.

This is true. I do feel that the sooner you get cities under your command the better off you are. And I'm not saying that rifling + steel is a bad choice at all. My sense is just the *ease* of conquering is strongest with tanks supported by say bombers. I was just amazed at the rate of conquering I enjoyed with the mayans with my tank/gunship/bomber army (no need for gunships, i just personally enjoy them as a unit). Gilgamesh had a 20 city empire and it fell so quickly in the replay, it was insane. Bombers can teleport to conquered cities immediately after the city is conquered and have good range so you have fast-moving siege and fast-moving tanks to take the cities with. As long as you keep defenders at bay with your offensive stack then you can have slower-moving defenders coming in or, alternatively, you could whip an airport after the city comes out of revolt and airlift in defenders (though that leaves the city defenseless for a good number of turns).

 

[madscientist]

But:

1) It also takes a lot more than 10 turns to tech up to tanks and airships versus rifles and cannons. To get started with tanks, you need thousands (tens of thousands?) more beakers than the going to rifling + steel. And unlike rifles or cannons, you can't upgrade anything to tanks.
QUOTE]

BUT, while you are teching industrialization/combustion/electricity you are building factories and power plants. Tanks cost alot more beaker to build, but you have alot more production by that point. Plus you usually have the ironworks city running by then.

 

[ds61514]

BUT, while you are teching industrialization/combustion/electricity you are building factories and power plants. Tanks cost alot more beaker to build, but you have alot more production by that point. Plus you usually have the ironworks city running by then.

Tanks may have 2 moves to Infantry's one, but it's blunted by the following:

1) You will hit forest/hills
2) You need to heal.
3) If I attacked with rifles, I can parlay industrialization into economic growth instead of using it on military, thus getting a faster spaceship or access to stealth bombers/jet fighters/mech inf/modern armor.

For intercontinental invasions I fully support industrialism for a full suite of WW2 units. But if the target is right next to me, rifles and cannons (or elephants/catas) all the way.

 

[InvisibleStalke]

Paratroopers and bombers FTW!

Well - they are even faster than tanks, and a lot of fun too. Drop them next to the enemy city, take it the next turn, rince and repeat. Supported by bombers you can rampage through an AI at lightspeed.

Personally I have no problem with armies of 1 move units taking cities. The AI may whip more defenders, but your 1 move armies come with cannons/catapults etc and can drop defenses and deliver collateral damage. Your one move units get terrain defenses too. So it more than evens out. So what if it takes 20 turns rather than 10 to destroy their empire? The game is still long enough that this is an eyeblink on the replay.

Once I crush their attack armies, I do like to have two stacks - a fast moving one that takes weaker peripheral cities quickly, and a infantry battle stack that takes the heavily defended cities.