What makes the best Army?

[swordwiz]

A cav or MA army with 4 movement and blitz is deadly. If the AI is really that strong, your defence army wont really do anything either. Since AI doesnt attack armies, just send some into their core to raze (since they will attack an army if its a city) their core cities

 

[a4phantom]

I've never made a defensive army, coz I remember sun tze once saying that offence is the best defence.
Anyway, I do see the idea of a defensive army, but an army full of MA is better for the following reasons.

1. 4 movement points is very dangerous, especially with the army's blitz.
2. High attack strength, it can punch through any line of defence
3. MA's have reasonably good defense strength, even though its not the highest.

Did Sun Tzu really say that? I agree about offensive armies, particularly cavalry and at best Sipahi. Of course that leaves a weak defense (10/3/4) but once you capture a city it's easy to bring musketmen riflemen or infantry in on rails. If you're blessed with more armies/MGLs than you need for offense, by all means make a couple of defensive armies, but how often does that happen?

Secondly, I would like to raise a question about mixing units. In the earlier ages, (before tanks) it would be wise to either have a defence unit standing on the square of the army to protect it or mix it into the army. I would like your point of view. Usually defence units are slower. So if i have an army of 2 cavalry and one rifleman, they would only move 2 steps. That is the first disadvantage. On the other hand, if they are attacked the rifle man would take up defence and have all the health points.

I think the rifleman would simply add to the defensive rating of the army and lower the offensive rating, because the army is not a collection of units able to use the best one for each task but a single unit with the averaged scores(hat tip collin_stp). Adding a rifleman to a cavalry army would probably make it 5/4/2 rather than 6/3/4, and I know which I'd rather have.

I have heard of people making something known as an artillery army. So why not have one offense unit, one defence unit and one artillery unit. Then your army would be multi-purpose, bombard and attack and can defend itself. When you get the pentagon you could add a high-health unit, special units like war elephant or ancient cavalry (anything with the one extra HP bonus) just to give it more health, since the army already can attack.... What do you guys think?

1. I don't think you can add artillery units to an army.

2. Units in an army lose the bombard ability.

3. Thinking as you are, I made an army of two Arq samurai (10/8/1 with a bombard of 5) and a samurai warrior (7/7/1 with an extra hitpoint). I assumed that the army would use its best unit for attacking and for defending, in each case the arq samurai, and that the samurai warrior would act as hitpoint padding. However, the army was 9/8/2 and had no bombard, the only "ability" transferred was the samurai warrior's extra hp.

So I think mixing offensive and defensive units makes for an army that is slow and mediocre at both. Adding that mech infantry to your tank army is a good idea though, if I understand the mechanics of it the defense should rise considerably more than the offense is lowered, and no speed will be lost. But this is a special case because it is a modern defender (the only mobile one) and old attackers.

 

[Rik Meleet]

Best is only what you need. If you are on the defensive; an army of pikes, rifles, Infs or Mech Infs are the best. It can boost the defensive needs of cities where needed.
If you're attacking and conquesting; an army of Swords, Cavs, Tanks, MA is unstopppable.
But if you're not under threat, but can't attack (unit-shortness), it becomes interesting. In the middel ages I fill them with a mix of units; 2 Pikes and 1 MDI for instance. Than you can pillage a lot of the lands, while having a proper defense and also attack power.
Later on a cav-army can pillage really really well, but be aware of counterattacks.
When I've build the Pentagon I usually add a Mech Inf to the Pike/MDI army or a MA to the Cav army. Same (or better) movement, while increasing the defense and attack. The Speed and the pillaging ability of armies is the greatest strength.

a4phantom: In Sengoku, it works very well to have 2 arquebusiers and your fully upgraded Diamyo in an army The Diamyo (who will attack first) still can enslave !

 

[577517]

I mainly use offensive units in my armies but not always.

 

[Hygro]

In conquests, its a conquistador army! 3 movement, treat all terrain as roads, free pillage. That's about 9 pillaged tiles a turn!

 

[Hygro]

a4phantom: In Sengoku, it works very well to have 2 arquebusiers and your fully upgraded Diamyo in an army The Diamyo (who will attack first) still can enslave !

But won't work as an assassin, have ATR, amphibious, etc.

 

[a4phantom]

a4pantom: In Sengoku, it works very well to have 2 arquebusiers and your fully upgraded Diamyo in an army The Diamyo (who will attack first) still can enslave !

Thanks for the tip, I had no idea the diamyo would keep his enslave ability. But as Hygro pointed out, he'll lose his other abilities (except probably detect invisible). On the other hand, you'd greatly reduce your risk of losing him, so if he's under siege in your last city and you're running out the clock on a diplo victory . . . Also, if you band him with yamabushi to boost his hitpoints, not only will the resulting army have fairly low attack and only moderate defense, but it will also not have ATR. I think this might be a bug, but it's the case in Conq 1.20.

 

[ongwin]

The army of conquistador idea is an interesting one. Why aren't we able to make an army of marines, which could conduct amphibious assault? Why not an army of paratroopers which we can rename the 101st airborne division I think what we need is army of special abilities, e.g. paradrop, amphibious assault, bombard?

 

[Hygro]

In PTW and conquest, if you make an army of all the same unit, they often keep their special abilities. Amphibious is kept, but airdrop isnt.

 

[a4phantom]

The army of conquistador idea is an interesting one. Why aren't we able to make an army of marines, which could conduct amphibious assault? Why not an army of paratroopers which we can rename the 101st airborne division I think what we need is army of special abilities, e.g. paradrop, amphibious assault, bombard?

An army of bombarding units would be kind of stupid in my view, although I like the idea of capturing an army of four radar artillery with an old spearmen who's been on MP duty for 6000 years. Amphibious assault is kept, maybe paradrop should be (Market Garden).

 

[troytheface]

when using an infantry army i like to add a guerilla- same attack as infantry but gives you a bombard if attacked...in regard to culture flipping...i have learned to never keep a captured city (facism, emperor, huge), to much of a worry and bother , i just bring settlers behind my invasion force and raze
everything- wonder citys included- (last game razed magellens and leonardos)
My theory- skip researching most dead end techs including nationalism and military tradition-and Raze!

 

[a4phantom]

when using an infantry army i like to add a guerilla- same attack as infantry but gives you a bombard if attacked...in regard to culture flipping...i have learned to never keep a captured city (facism, emperor, huge), to much of a worry and bother , i just bring settlers behind my invasion force and raze
everything- wonder citys included- (last game razed magellens and leonardos)
My theory- skip researching most dead end techs including nationalism and military tradition-and Raze!

And I think to myself, what a wonderful world . . .


Does the guerilla unit keep its defensive bombard when loaded in an army?

Incidently, defensive armies (infantry, TOW, mech infantry) are fantastic pillagers.