Weak armies in vanilla and PTW

Jivilov

Prince
Joined
Nov 16, 2011
Messages
414
Greetings Civ3 fans. After diligently checking the forums I haven't found any discussion of this particular issue, so maybe it's just me.

In any event, the problem is this: Whenever I've used armies (legionaries, knights, etc.) in vanilla and PTW they invariably lose after fighting just one or two battles. They'll attack, get down to yellow-line, then attack again, almost always losing. If they win (rarely), they're at red-line and succumb to AI counterattack during IBT (happened the other day on PTW with an elite legionary army against a Zulu knight).

Funny, it doesn't happen with Conquests. Armies work just fine on v1.20/22 C3C. In fact, a longbowman army won several times over wounded infantry recently in a losing Demigod effort.

But over the years, every time I've used armies in C3 vanilla or PTW they get crushed, so I've practically given up on them. Anybody else have this experience? Thanks for your kind attention.
 
Conquests gave a huge boost to armies. Before Conquests an army was just a group of units that fought with collective hit points. Still pretty good, but nothing like Conquests' armies. A longbow army would attack with strength 4.

Vanilla and PTW armies don't blitz; you're just seeing each unit in the army take a turn as the collective health goes down.

Among other things in Conquests armies get a boost to their attack and defense values relative to its units:

C3C Changes from PTW

Changes to Armies

Armies now get a bonus to their A/D/M values. The bonus to A is equal to the sum of the A values of all units in the army divided by 6 and rounded down (e.g. 3 cavalry in an army has an A bonus of (6+6+6)/6 = 3 and 3 swords in an army have an A bonus of (3+3+3)/6 = 1). Building the Military Academy makes the denominator 4 instead of 6. The D bonus is similar, but with D values summed. All armies also get a +1 M value (one extra movement point). Thus, an army of 4 cavalry after the Military Academy has been built (assumes Pentagon, too), is effectively a 12/6/4 unit.
Armies also heal in enemy territory (one hp/unit pre-Battlefield Medicine and two hp/unit after), can pillage without expending a movement point, and heal much faster in your territory than before, too. Armies also have extended viewing range (+1 tile), blitz, and zone of control.

One thing that is better (or at least more powerful) in vanilla and PTW is that military leaders can rush great wonders which could be another incentive not to make armies before Conquests.
 
Conquests gave a huge boost to armies. Before Conquests an army was just a group of units that fought with collective hit points. Still pretty good, but nothing like Conquests' armies. A

Vanilla and PTW armies don't blitz; you're just seeing each unit in the army take a turn as the collective health goes down. A longbow army would attack with strength 4.

Among other things in Conquests armies get a boost to their attack and defense values relative to its units:

One thing that is better (or at least more powerful) in vanilla and PTW is that military leaders can rush great wonders which could be another incentive not to make armies before Conquests.

Much obliged Puppeteer. You've pretty well covered the subject and steered me in the right direction (i.e., don't bother with armies in vanilla or PTW). Cheers and happy gaming!:goodjob:
 
Well, actually I've seen and read many opinions considering armies (especially in Conquest) beeing overpowered:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=435718&page=2

http://www.garath.net/Sullla/Civ3/conquestsed.html => Point 5)

Outstanding links gps. Much appreciated.

Regarding the first, here's a quote from "vmxa" concerning AI ability to rush all wonders with GML's: "You did not know that the AI can rush wonders in C3C with an MGL? The reason they can is they do not use the interface (gui) that humans use and that is where the check is to prevent use of MGL on a great wonder." This was definitely news to me, and helps to explain how the AI can build them so fast.

Regarding the second, when I saw "Sulla" in there I knew it was gonna be good. While it seemed familiar, I'd never really internalized his observations in any practical way. The Bomber exploit was a real eye-opener (including the cratered continent screenshot). His objection to late map-trading was also well taken; I'd thought it unrealistic to forbid map-trading if you already knew Map Making. Hadn't realized it was actually a human advantage, since the AI stinks at exploration!

Sulla's primary objection to the SoZ was based on the limited, "clumped" availability of ivory, but mine is based on the ability to make mounted units without horses. Likewise, it seems a stretch to have the ability to make Crusaders without iron. But that's just me.

And yeah, armies ARE too powerful in C3C. You can send them into AI territory and plunder at will, without even spending movement points. Then there's their increased combat values, additional MP, and near-immunity from attack. Coupled with the AI's inability to use them halfway effectively, armies are a definite exploit for the human player. They do, however, act as a counterweight to the AI's ability to use GML's to rush great wonders as noted above.

OK, sorry to get a bit off-topic, but there's a lot of food for thought here. Thanks for reading and have a happy. :)
 
Back
Top Bottom