Useless Armies?!

[Ironikinit]

I read elsewhere that armies cannot be airlifted. Makes sense because armies count as 3 units.

Samurai armies do indeed kick butt. I've had success with them vs. fortified riflemen. Samurai are great army prospects, good on both offense and defense, move of two, and can't be upgraded.

I'm not sure what to think on the elite unit vs. veteran unit armies. It does seem like you'd want the elites out in the field trying to generate leaders. Has anyone managed to generate a leader with an army? If so, then it might be worthwhile to put an elite unit or two in them. I have seen a vet unit upgrade to elite while attacking in an army.

I would like an addition of an admiral unit that is generated by victory by an elite sea unit, but I don't know what sort of benefit to give it... creates a fleet or maybe harbors in all your coastal cities? Anyway, not really something that could be added to Civ 3.

 

[Moulton]

I put vet units in the armies, and had several upgrad to elite while in the army.

 

[BillChin]

For those that believe armies are useless, the first army I ever created has just saved my butt. I am playing on Emperor difficulty, random civ, standard size map. I conquer my continent while the Zulu conquer theirs. It is time for the big show down. I grab a couple of island colonies before massing troops for a mainland invasion.

I bring five Galleons with Calvary, cannons, and my army of Knights. I land them on a hilly penisula and take the city of St. Petersburg. The initial operation goes well with minor casualties. Unfortunately, the Zulus buzz like an angry bee hive sending stack after stack of six or eight troops in against my positions. Impis, Calvary, Rifleman, all charge in, taking heavy casualties that are quickly replaced. I only have 20 units in the initial landing, so I am soon outnumbered 2 to 1. I lose the city because I dare not stack my troops there for fear of a culture flip. My units are trapped and surrounded on a hilltop. The only thing saving them from being driven back into the sea is the army of Knights.

I land reinforcements, but I can not land them on the hilltop with the army. My meager reinforcements are crushed in short order by wave after wave of enemies. I pull off the wounded Elite Calvary units and bring them to an island barracks to bring them back up to strength. I am waiting for a second army, an army of infantry, to land before I consider going back on the offense. Some artillery will help too.

This is one time where Naval superiority would help a great deal, as the Zulu navy is pounding my coastlines, destroying valuable improvements and cutting off cities. They have not managed a successful troop landing, but their bombardments are irritating the heck out of me.

 

[RAL2000]

Using a leader to build a wonder creates a HUGE and immediate advantage. Ditto a forbidden palace. At worst, even a city improvement grants obvious advantage.

The benefits of an army are so obscure that we have a two page debate trying to decide whether there really are any.

Doesn't that make it rather clear where you should use your leaders?

 

[Moulton]

My armies have been good defensive units... As for the navy... build artillary and heve some ships in striking distance. WHen they bombard your coast, fire right back... artillary will take a ship down to 1 hp , and then any available ship can sink itl Even it you dont have enough ships nearby, they will retreat, and it will be many turns before they can come back. My shore batteries rock. Rail guns, yet.

 

[eyrei]

Originally posted by RAL2000
Using a leader to build a wonder creates a HUGE and immediate advantage. Ditto a forbidden palace. At worst, even a city improvement grants obvious advantage.

The benefits of an army are so obscure that we have a two page debate trying to decide whether there really are any.

Doesn't that make it rather clear where you should use your leaders?

The benefits of one army may not be huge, but they are not obscure. The AI will not attack an army at full strength, so they can function as a mobile base for your cavalry to heal. They are excellent for escorting artillery for the same reason. They nearly ensure the defense of any city they are fortified in. One victory with an army allows your to build three small wonders one of which increases your chance of spawning another wonder-rushing leader. They can take out the toughest defender in a city, revealing the weak, non-upgraded units beneath.

Once you build the military academy, you can build an offensive force with multiple armies, to overrun your enemies, or you can fortify one in each of your border cities, and concentrate, without worries, on offense.

Don't try to tell us armies are useless. For the price of one leader, your gain long-term benefits that outweigh the benefits of any single wonder I can think of.

 

[Zachriel]

Here, here!

 

[simon.hurst]

I've been quite lucky and got quite a few even with non-militaristic civs. Anyone else noticed that an army can't pillage? Total waste of space.

 

[eyrei]

Originally posted by simon.hurst
I've been quite lucky and got quite a few even with non-militaristic civs. Anyone else noticed that an army can't pillage? Total waste of space.

Why would you waste an army's time using it to pillage anyway? Any good defensive unit should suffice for this task.

 

[cegman]

Does a army cost all three upkeep or does it count as one

 

[FriendlyFire]

Q Why do most vet player use there FIRST leader to make an Army ?

A. So you can get the heroic Epic
Heroic Epic == More Leaders
Leaders == Monopoly on Wonders

I use Armies as STRONG defensive units. I use them offensivly to escort stacks over open terrain, protected wounded units.

Defeating enemies armies are a breeze. The AI don't know how to use the army stack (*cough* like some of the player here *cough* ). Lure them onto the open (with a worker/ offensive unit) and take them apart with offensive units.

If you havn't picked up the ovious tip here. Stack the ALL OF THE SAME UNITS into the stack. i.e swordman/knights etc Strong attack units with good defence values.

 

[akadyer]

Armies can be very useful when combined with bombard units the army will attack a weaker defender and will have a better chance to knock that defender out of the game so i will say that armes wrok better in the modern age with artillary and bombers,

However using a leader to create an army past your first is a waste wait till you can build your won armies and buld as many as you can but do not stack until you are forced ino war that way you will have the armies with the best units availiable

The big improvement needed for an army is the ability to unload units so they can be upgraded or atleast allow units to be upgraded to their max potential

 

[ChickinSht]

The point isn't that armies are completely useless, just mostly useless. As for late game and in the modern age, why would anyone use an army? Four tanks alone fare much MUCH better than one army of tanks.

 

[Ironikinit]

IMO the best armies are swordsmen and cavalry cos it toughens them up to fight tougher opposition and they are unupgradable. Extends their battle worthiness. Swordsmen armies work ok against pikemen. Kill the pikemen with your army and get the spearman underneath with your knights.

 

[simon.hurst]

Originally posted by eyrei


Why would you waste an army's time using it to pillage anyway? Any good defensive unit should suffice for this task.

This isn't always true - single musketmen often get their butts kicked but an army of them is pretty hard. I didn't have sufficient troops for a major counter attack but my army of musketmen should have been able to screw the enemys infrastructure - unfortunately though an army can't pillage!

 

[Zachriel]

Originally posted by ChickinSht
The point isn't that armies are completely useless, just mostly useless. As for late game and in the modern age, why would anyone use an army? Four tanks alone fare much MUCH better than one army of tanks.

That's assuming you have a technological advantage, which may not always be true. If you are a lesser power, then armies can give one the edge on the attack.

 

[eyrei]

Originally posted by cegman
Does a army cost all three upkeep or does it count as one

I think they actually cost 4 upkeep because the army itself counts as a unit.

Originally posted by ChickinSht
The point isn't that armies are completely useless, just mostly useless. As for late game and in the modern age, why would anyone use an army? Four tanks alone fare much MUCH better than one army of tanks.

Ever try a d-day style invasion without an army of infantry or mechanized infantry to protect your tanks on the first turn. If you haven't, you are losing a lot of units pointlessly. At this point in the game, where all tiles are railroaded, the ai can attack your stack with every tank and cavalry it has. If you land one or two armies of defensive units, it may not even attack, and if it does, it will lost many units, making your conquest that much easier.

Again, if you are not the most powerful civ, which is the case many times on higher levels, skillful use of armies can give you a strategic edge that should not be underestimated. Have you ever watched the AI try to take a city guarded by an army of infantry? Pretty amusing, if it tries at all. Place an army in each city along the border, and the AI might declare war, but never do anything but pillage a few outlying tiles, even if they are far more powerful than you.

As for them being useless in the late game, I will only say that my games are generally decided by the end of the industrial era or even earlier. Yes, 4 tanks are better than an army of tanks, but an army of 4 infantry or mech infantry is much better than 4 of these units individually. You can mix them up to create hybrid armies. Place 3 tanks and a mech infantry in an army - you lose no mobility, lose only 1 attack point, and gain 3 defense points - a unit with 15 attack, 11 defense, 2 moves and 16+ hitpoints should not be underestimated.

 

[Woody]

Four tanks alone fare much MUCH better than one army of tanks.

Well thats true to a point but if your attacking a city with 20+ pop and veteran mech infantry your going to loose 2-3 modern armor where the army will win 99% of the time.

 

[ChickinSht]

Originally posted by eyrei


I think they actually cost 4 upkeep because the army itself counts as a unit.
Ever try a d-day style invasion

Again, I'm not saying they have no use whatsoever. I'm saying, in general they just haven't done much (in general, I don't launch too many d-day style invasions). Everytime I have ever used an army, it has suffered a humiliating loss, except for early game, and by the time I get a leader that early, the civ I've been warring with is gone. I ALWAYS benefit more from using a leader to build, say, the Great Library or Sun Tzu's before anyone else. This causes the enemy civs to lose all that production, and saves me a lot of money, which comes in very handy later on. I'm not saying armies don't have uses. I'm saying great leaders have better uses than building armies. And that late game they're next to completely useless, even when you stack 4 mech inf together. Late game, when you have all your major cities connected by railroad (hopefully), and you're getting hammered, I'd rather have 3 or 4 units I can move anywhere I want to, than one, big, extra powerful unit. The increased mobility more than makes up for a few extra units lost. Plus, in enemy territory, they take forever to get back up to full health. And rarely have I ever fought a battle (just one battle, not many consecutive ones) where my army wasn't taken down a huge amount in hp.

 

[eyrei]

I almost always use my first leader to build an army, and then win a battle with it. Then I build the heroic epic ASAP increasing my chances for leaders to rush wonders. Never again do you even have to consider turning a leader into an army, because you can build them at the end of the middle ages. This is particularly important if you are playing a militaristic civ. It maximizes the chance to get leaders, and gives you a strategic advantage because you can make use of several armies at a time.

Most wonders will not change the course of the game by themselves, and neither will one army. My point is that the options and benefits that having won a victory with an army opens up are numerous, though difficult to quantify. All together they can definately change the course of a game, especially if you are lagging behind in territory, or need to procure a resource.