Discussion in 'Civ3 - Strategy & Tips' started by Homie, Jul 25, 2002.
How did this thread get revived? It has risen from the dead
Someone who said that Jet Fighters were the worst units.
I think that air units as a whole are worse than ground or sea units. Me using them and the AI using them. For one, I see them useful only to bomb out resource roads, and maybe for bombing cities down to size. The AI uses them so aggressively that it's impossible to get around ANYWHERE. They took out every RR and road around a city once.
Even though I read the article, "Using Explorers Revealed" I still have to say the Explorer is pretty weak. I send them out to pillage roads, like the author said, but they can't fight off anything and they get destroyed a lot. The thing that I do like about them is that they can escape after pillaging.
I am not playing for so long, as today game I avoid to build:
Chariot, too early for me to attack need to grow, will wait for horseman.
Catapult, Too expensive to build at that time, not very efficient
Longbowmen as far as I can build Knights, no comparison
Privateer, for what ?
Paratrooper and Marines, want to go to computer and synthetic fiber ASAP
Destroyer, will wait with Ironclad until I can build battleship (no upgrade)
Helicopter for same reason as Marines and Paratroopers
Sub-marine (move only 4) but will definitly build 10 to 20 Nuclear submarine all of them carrying tactical nuke
Dead-end units are pointless for me. I call them the worse once they become obselete. Swordsmen, Calvary, Longbowmen, Ironclads, and so forth.
This is why I avoid building Horsemen, Warriors, Archers, or anything else like that. Though it's hard to resist the cheap cost of warriors - half the cost of spearmen.
For very early wars Horseman and Swordsman are they way to go - dead end or not.
Way more useful than two items mentioned in this poll.
Stealth fighter is the worst.
No air supremacy, can't do anything else better than the stealth bomber.
Why did they make this unit?
I agree with you on warriors and archers but disagree with horsemen. HB, it occurs to me that if you play that way, you have no offense till modern times!
The rider-Knight-cavalry chain does indeed run out of steam but you should be able to conquer at least 2 civs with that riding horde before they all die off.
Next time you play, try building alot of riders early on, getting the sun tzu and or leonardo, getting chivalry first, making the riders knights, and conquering the world! Civ3 is a horseman's game!
One early domination strategy delays the researching of Horseback Riding until a heap of chariots are build ($ not science)and upgrades the lot initiating a horse rush.
As to steath fighters, the very late redundant part of the tech tree further lowers it's worthiness.
So, you build chariots, while lowering science to build up cash, then when you have horseback you use the cash to upgrade into a mass of riders.
This sounds like a good strategy in chieftain/warlord level games, but can it possibly work on higher levels where the early age is a blur of AI tech proliferation?
I am not sure but I thing the way to use the stealth fighter is to send it 'reco' above a city you want to bombard, checking if there are some fighters.
Now if you have stealth bombers, you will only loose very few against fighters, so I agree with you this unit (stealth fighter) is AFAIN useless.
Merci JMK. I agree. Better to have jets that can go on defense.
I was losing fast with Calvary. I was at war with the English. Either they got really lucky or they had Knights (I'm sure it was horsemen) because I lost a whole stack of calvary.
Another time as the Russians, I was fighting against the Romans. Two cossacks got beat by one lone spearmen.
That was then when my faith in Calvary disappeared.
Well, hb, I can empathize a bit. I have noticed I am using my cavalry as attrition waves against rifleman defended cities at the moment. The fact that they back off before the last hit point is spent means that if you throw thirty at a city you will still have plenty left later on.
I am also annoyed that my cavalry get beat by cavalry on defense in the open field and also in the reverse situation.
So what do you use to fight before tanks? I still swear by the horse horde, especially if you have the jump on them in tech.
You can bet the harem that I will not be using this strategy in this month's GOTM
Rumor has it Aeson's high score was do to getting wayyy too many chariots with ICS and upgraded them to knights as he took over the world. (This was on diety).
one time I was playing a game with 14 AI civs, i made a map with about 80% land, huge size. I was very advanced (I didn't cheat,) I had peace with 7 of the 8 civs, I destroyed the rest of them. I had almot all the wonders, except a few small ones. All my important cities that I cared about had all the buildings I wanted in them, and I had 50+ troops, mostly tanks and mech infantry. The 1 civ I was at war with started bombarding my capital with cannons, year about 1950. They caused no damage, except one of my mech infantrys lost one hit point after about 5 bombardments. They had no infantry support, I took them all over, but disbanded them. I was bored with tanks and mech infantry, so I built some stealth bombers, and bombarded the hell out of their cities, killed most of their units, (My civ surrounded completely their civ, all their tiles except the innermost few were in range,) In one turn my tanks, with mech inf. supporting, drove a spearhead and cut their civ in 2 parts. A city of theirs revolted into my hands. The next turn i bombed the last of their units, and finished them off.
I don't really have a point, the only reason my stealths were good was because i was bombing riflemen and cavalry, but in this case the AI did bombard me, just in a stupid way, no infantry support. If you must bombard, then I would wait for artillery, or otherwise use ships. The only reason I had stealth was because I had never gotten around to using htem and I wanted to see how much better they were. Besides the stealth factor, they sucked.
first of all, you don't slam the cruise missiles. I've talked to any people and no one seems to like them, but if you want to blitz a city, you need artillery to bombard and then the cruise missile to finish off the units. I've taken cities without having to have a single battle, which is always nice . Chariots are rather worthless, because even if you get the tech AND you happen to have horsies in your sphere of influence, they still can't move in mountains or jungles. explorers are useful, if you can use them right. F-15's aren't bad...I actually have had a few games where jet fighters were good to have, and F-15's are obviously an improvement of that, plus if you're America and you haven't had your golden age yet, imagine how good it would be to have it that late in the game. Subs aren't completely worthless...they do help you watch out for enemy nuclear subs. tactical nukes suck too...just go for ICBMs.
So we'll have to go with chariots, or maybe archers, because I can get iron working before warriot code, and swordsmen are MUCH better than archers. ~ Brendan
Thanks . Before tanks? I don't conduct (and avoid) warfare during the transition time between the industrial and modern ages. I was fortified on mountains at that point, and they still @$#% beat me.
When I downloaded a SAV I had to fight when there was no tanks. I had infantry and marines and the Russians had Riflemen. It was a disaster at that. Enough Longbowmen and Riflemen cut down the infantry and marines with speed. That was the only time, and I won't do that again.
Worst unit? stealth fighter- #1- No air superiority option.
#2-How do u get precision attack to work?
Pre-tank unit(s)? Cavalry, w/ cavalry as backup.
The worst unit in the game under my conclusion is the explorer. Although it has a good trait, movement regardless of terrain, it still comes way to late in the game to cause anything to happen really. Also, the privateers would be the ultimate unit if it had better stats. A phantom attacker could be a leader's best friend. You could knock out foreign shipping and still maintain a friendly basis. But, privateers have horrible stats so it makes them bad. Also, what's wrong with the Man-O-Wars, I think they're pretty good, good bombardment, excellent in aiding an attack agains coastal enemy cities.
Separate names with a comma.