1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

WW1 style artillery rush

Discussion in 'Civ3 Strategy Articles' started by robinm, Jun 10, 2002.

  1. robinm

    robinm Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2001
    Messages:
    53
    Location:
    wellington,NZ
    Many people seem to value Cavalry and mobile offensive units as the best way to break open besieged enemy cities. While I can see this working in Medieval times and once you have tanks, there is that curious gap in the offensive tech tree that is know as the industrial ages.

    Since Replaceable Parts can be researched quite early in the Industrial age and it gives you the 6/10 infantry, there can be a long period where the defensive units have a strong advantage over the offense ( 6/3 Cavalry , which doesn't actually have any better offensive stat than the infantry ). You get trench warfare very much like WW1. Many suicidal charges are needed by infantry and cavalry just to kill one defending infantry, especially if they are in a large city :(

    This post explains my method for conducting reasonably fast, very efficient war in this tech environment.

    Firstly identify why you are in this war:

    1. They started it and you want peace. You're stalling until they will talk to you.
    2. Limited war to get a specific objective: a resource or a clearly defined chunk of territory. Also you might just be punishing them for starting a war, but be clear how far you're going to punish them.
    3. You plan to drive them into the sea and own all of their land.
    All of these scenarios can be handled with variations on the same theme: the AI does not understand railroads and does not understand artillery (which becomes available with replaceable parts at the start of the age of trench warfare). All of the tactics below become more effective the larger the map is, as you have a bigger empire's troop output that you can concentrate just as effectively using railroads.

    So what units do you have available?

    Mounted units upgraded to cavalry. Nice to have them hanging around but don't bother building any more, as they're going to be obsolete soon and they're not key to the plan.

    Infantry. Very hard for the AI to kill. Makes your cities very hard to take. Slow to move around, so you want lots spare. Also they're actually going to be doing a lot of the attacking, so you'll be loosing some of them. 50% of your unit producing cities should be making infantry. All of these cities should have barracks

    Big Guns. Artillery. Upgrade all those old cannons and catapults (small point here - cannons can't do mountains, artillery can). You just cannot get enough of these. 50% of your unit producing cities should be producing these. If you find that you're not losing too many infantry then up this % to 60 or 70 %. These cities don't need barracks as there's no such thing as a veteran artillery.

    The arguments about alliances / RoP and such like we will leave, as they belong in a discussion about diplomacy. They are important, but lets just stick to the tactics of war here.

    There are two themes we use:

    Firstly, your large stacks of artillery can hit any tile in your empire and any tile within 2 moves of your borders at will. This is because you've built a good rail network , right? The firepower will be delivered without mercy, and any stack of guns will be covered by at least 3 infantry. Armies of infantry can be good for this role, as you don't care if they can't attack as frequently as solo units: they are there as a deterrent.

    Secondly, fortified units in cities are very hard to kill. Units moving through open ground are much easier to kill. Any unit that you place in the open (especially if it got hurt fighting) should get a 4 hp infantry escort. Any unit of theirs that shows its face should be gunned down with no mercy. This is after all trench warfare, attrition is king, and anything you can kill easily is much better than letting it get fortified in a big city.

    Now the actual tactics, depending on which warfare mode you are in.

    A) Defensive war mode. You are numerically inferior to the opposition, so don't plan to make inroads into his territory. He will dutifully send stacks of units at you. Try to hold the hills and high ground near your border with stacks of infantry + artillery. Shred as many units of his to 1 hp with artillery fire as possible. Even if you lack the units to actually kill them afterwards then they are knocked out of the offense and will be retreated to heal. All your artillery should be moved into firing positions and fired every turn. If you run out of targets, save the spare artillery until the end of the turn. Sometimes you'll attack a 1hp infantry with one of yours and still loose, and their infantry gets promoted, thus gaining 1hp. Use your spare shots to put them back down to 1 hp. If you still have spare shots then take out the railroads and roads across the border in his empire to slow down the offense and slow down the recycling of damaged units. If you feel you have some spare infantry / cavalry for offensive raids then use them to attack his 1 hp units. Start with his cavalry ( since its already been bombarded to 1 hp it can't retreat from your infantry ). If you get on to killing his 1 hp infantry then take the units on plains / grassland / desert first. Be very careful about attacking across rivers and attacking fortified infantry. As soon as his 1 hp infantry gets dug in or in hills then there is a small chance your 4/4 infantry will loose, and the whole idea here is to inflict attrition while sustaining minimal actual unit losses yourself. Use his stacks to keep your units in position.

    E.g. , you have 15 artillery guarded on a hill by 5 infantry and he has moved a stack of 6 cavalry to the adjacent grassland. More cavalry and infantry is coming up behind. You have 2 spare cavalry on your rail network. Fire all the artillery at the cavalry until they are 1 hp each. Draft in more Artillery from elsewhere if you have it and need to. You can probably afford to unfortified 2-3 infantry. Attack with these, killing the 1 hp 3 def cavalry. Attack with your 2 cavalry as well. Don't kill the last 1 hp cavalry, as this will pull your attacking unit off your defended hill and into the open. If you don't have a spare cavalry available to kill the last unit in a stack ( i.e. attack and retreat again ) then let it live. You have inferior numbers so need to preserve every unit you can.

    This tactic also forms the basis of B) Limited war , and C) Total Annihilation war when mopping up his counter attacks. The first 5 or so turns will probably involve much of your artillery shattering his counter attacks, and not much taking of cities, but this phase will pass as you slaughter his offensive troops and take light losses yourself.

    This method can be used to hold an enemy with many more troops for many turns. In the end he will agree to peace and you won't have lost too many troops or too much progress vs. the rest of the world.

    How you take cities in limited and total war :

    Its the same basic method for both.

    Points to note about defended cities:

    Defenders get 50% bonus if pop > 6 and 100% bonus if pop > 12. They also get 50% bonus if the city is on a hill, 25% bonus of you attack across a river, and 50% bonus just for being fortified. So infantry fortified in a size 15 city on a hill has an effective defense of 10 + 10 * (1 + 0.5 + 0.5 ) = 30 !!!. Versus any of your attackers with attack 6 then they will win 5 / 6 combat rounds. Your 16/16 army of cavalry stands a better than even chance of dying against a single 4/4 infantry !!!
    A besieged city will draft further infantry. It can't do this if the population is <= 6
    A damaged defender will recover all his hp if fortified in a city with barracks.
    So how do you deal with this massively powerful defense? Artillery. Guns. Shooting big shells. Bombardment. Lots and lots and lots of it. You just can't get enough, its like Chocolate or MTV. Too much is never enough. I tend to deal with artillery in my offensive phase in stacks of 20 +. I have been known to fire 50 shots at a single besieged city and then choose not attack it that turn.

    When to attack a city :

    1. Pop <= 6. If you plan to keep the city then it pays to bombard it all the way down to 1 pop, then you hardly ever get culture flipped.
    2. Best defensive unit showing has 1 hp. Ideally the barracks will be destroyed if you are in a multi turn bombardment.

    This takes a lot of shooting. Patch 1.17 raised the building and population defense vs. bombardment to 12. When you fire at a city it seems to randomly determine if you target a building, a defender or a pop point. If the pop is already 1 and all the targetable building are already gone them you can still target them, and your bombardment attempt fails on those shots. Getting the last 2 infantry out of a ruined town can take a lot of guns, but if you have to shell then for 3 turns, so be it, at least you are not loosing units and they have all but lost the use of that town in terms of production, culture and population.

    Once you are attacking it make little difference if you use cavalry or infantry, as the opponent has 1 hp the cav won't retreat if they're loosing anyway. Lets revisit our besieged hilltop town from earlier:

    Pop is now down to 4, we know there are 4 infantry in it because we were paying attention as our 30 artillery damaged each one in turn. The barracks have been destroyed (actually everything has pretty much destroyed, though we suspect there might still be a marketplace standing). The defending infantry now has only a 100% def bonus , as we have reduced the pop from 15 to 4, so a total effective def of 20. The infantry will win approx. 75% (20 / (20 + 6 )) of rounds vs. our attacker, but it only has 1 hp, so must win 4 rounds in a row to actually win the battle. Better still we might be bringing some elite units to the party. P(win vs. vet) = 0.35 for the defender. P(win vs. elite) = 0.27. Yes , you will loose some units taking the city, but probably only 1 or 2, and he has actually lost more infantry in the process than you have.

    Even better is the fact that half taking the city doesn't actually cost you anything. If you half take a city by throwing 10 cavalry at it and don't complete the job, then next turn you'll be looking at more healed / drafted / reinforcement defenders, and you'll have 5 dead cavalry and 5 1 hp cavalry. If you bombard the hell out of the town and it doesn't get reduced enough, you just sit tight and repeat next turn. If you really have bitten off more than you can deal with them you'll find that his counter attack forces you to retreat the artillery from the siege and use them to crush the offensive, smoothly transitioning you to a defensive war of attrition with very little pain.

    Some words on Maneuver :

    Infantry and artillery are slow, but railroads make up for this.
    Railroads only work for you if they are outside the enemy territory, so clearly there is some slow moving to be done to actually take enemy cities. Some pointers.

    1. Unless you are totally on the defensive, don't take out roads and railways in the enemy territory - they'll be yours soon enough and you're going to need them to jump your artillery around the place.
    2. Artillery have a 2 tile rage. Sometimes they can hit the enemy city while still on a railroad in your territory, particularity in the opening phase of the war as you fight from across the original cultural boundaries. Often your artillery can reach a firing location only 1 tile into the enemy territory, so you plan 1 go ahead, choose a city to take , move gun stack 1 tile into enemy land, add 5 or so infantry to keep them protected, and fire away next turn. Once you leave your territory your guns and infantry are only moving 1 tile anyway, so you might as well move them onto hills or mountains if any present themselves. Keep them on the enemy roads or railroads however, as once the enemy city falls the territory will be yours and you don't want to waste a turn just getting your stack back onto the railroad network. Higher ground also means to can see what effect your shooting has ( see point 4 ).
    3. The attackers. Its easy to get in a situation where your gun stack has wrecked their city from 2 tiles away, but no attackers are on hand to deliver the killing blow. Forward planning is needed. Always have in mind which city you plan to move onto next. Bear in mind that is might not be next to the city you're currently working on. Your rail network allows you to switch your next attack to a city at the other end of the front. Also remember that the cultural borders shift as you take a town. If you are looking at moving on a city next to the one you have nearly taken, then play out the attack on the city you expect to take this turn first. Then you can see how the cultural border has shifted, and which railroad tiles now belong to you, then move making full use of the newly taken RR tiles and attack the next city.
    Often you will have a turns lag at the various units move through enemy tiles into position. 2 possibilities :

    Small gun stack - you'll need multi turn bombardment to reduce the target city.
    Turn 1 - Guns and escort move into firing position.
    Turn 2 - guns fire, escort infantry move adjacent to target city. Additional infantry move onto guns to protect them.
    Turn 3 - guns fire, infantry take city (if conditions are met to assault the city). RR tiles become yours, spare guns move to next fire location......

    Large Guns stack ( Depends on defenses... but 25 + is beginning to be large - only one turn of firing will be needed ).

    Turn 1 - Infantry forward assault team move in to enemy tile. Guns are still busy shooting at previous target.
    Turn 2 - Guns move to fire location with escort. Forward assault team move adjacent to target.
    Turn 3 - Guns fire, forward assault team take city. If the ground to be covered is flat then you can dispense with some of the assault team if you have enough cavalry to deliver the killing blow.

    4.Try very hard to have a unit who can see the results of your bombardment. Either use high ground or a "forward spotter" infantry. This allows you to see how many defending units there are, and when the last one is reduced to 1 hp so you can attack.


    5. Be careful with rivers. They are easy to overlook and can swing the defenders chances higher. Plan your maneuvers well.

    6. Cavalry. Since they have 3 movement they can provide a flexible shock assault squad without planning movement turns ahead. If you had a stack of infantry assigned to take a town and they have a very bad battle ( or you messed up the planning ) then the enemy city might be left standing with a single 1 hp defender. You just know you're going to be looking at another 3 defenders next turn, so now the few cavalry you own that were held in reserve on your rail network can swing in and save you a turn or 2 of re-bombardment.

    --- continued next post ---
     
  2. robinm

    robinm Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2001
    Messages:
    53
    Location:
    wellington,NZ
    These tactics will still work when tanks and mech. inf come along, as half the problem with taking a town is the massive defensive bonus given by the size of the town. Def values of units may go up with tech, but citizens will always have def vs. guns of 12.

    Guns vs. bombers is a whole other debate ... and a very interesting one too..... for another time

    Robin

    NB This post is also available in the War Academy

    http://www.civfanatics.com/civ3acad_Artillery_Rush.shtml
     
  3. dubois

    dubois Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2002
    Messages:
    3
    Location:
    Düsseldorf, Germany
    good strategy, i also try to win my wars since i play civ 2 back in the 90s.

    artillery attacks with no or next to no risk, your losses are zero.

    but in civ 3 the artillery versus citys is weak: 25% of attacks fail, 25% destroying city improvements, 25% killing people and only 25% reduce power of defenders, which is my first intention. it is realistic, though so im not really complaining.
    on open ground my hit rate of units is also never better than 30%.
     
  4. Maple

    Maple Canadian Patriot

    Joined:
    May 15, 2002
    Messages:
    370
    Location:
    At My Computer
    That's why large stacks of artillety are needed to attack things...
     
  5. Zouave

    Zouave Crusader

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2001
    Messages:
    1,603
    If we were using REALISTIC unit values cavalry as an offensive force wouldn't have a chance in hell against riflemen, let along infantry.

    What we need is more units, such as a more offensive "musket infantry" now armed with bayonets and a better musket; or, "shock troops" as an offensive infantry before tanks. We could also use a "horse cannon" unit with another MP.

    A lot of the problems are due to inadequate unit values, and insufficient number of units, with the basic game (see the Mods forum). The need for cannon/artillery is indeed most important when attacking - why the AI's inability to use bombardement units on the offensive is even more pathetic. :(
     
  6. Gundam

    Gundam Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 2, 2002
    Messages:
    35
    Location:
    In my mind
    25 is a rather big probability.this is a good tactic in an infantry vs infantry fight ")
     
  7. dialt0ne

    dialt0ne Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2002
    Messages:
    6
    All in all, excellent sound strategy - most of which I use myself.

    Another item I would like to add is semi-expendable workers. I usually keep enough captured workers so that I can build RR quickly in freshly captured territory so that I can move the big guns quickly into place to assault the next city in a big war. This works especially well if you have a Industrious civ where you only need 2 foreign workers to build RR, but the discovery of replacement parts lets you build RR with 2 native or 4 foreign workers. Maybe keep an extra infantry escort or three to cover the native workers - but only near the front line. Remember, thier Calvary can only move as far as yours, so if the workers are out of reach they'll be safe.
     
  8. robinm

    robinm Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2001
    Messages:
    53
    Location:
    wellington,NZ
    ....
    A good point by dialt0ne. The workers near the front can actaully be deliberatly given away to induce the enemy onto low defensive valu terrain. If you plan to wipe them out you'll get all the workers back and more , so loosing 1 or 2 to lure enemy infantry to their death is quitee acceptable.

    but in civ 3 the artillery versus citys is weak: 25% of attacks fail, 25% destroying city improvements, 25% killing people and only 25% reduce power of defenders, which is my first intention. it is realistic, though so im not really complaining.
    on open ground my hit rate of units is also never better than 30%.

    Dubois - the point is that I'm as interested in reducing the city population as I am in damaging the defenders. A defender can be halved in power just by levelling the city it stands in, even if it does not get damaged itself. Also the destruction on buildings is not as bad as it seems : All cultural buildings get destroyed when you take the town anyway, Aqueduct , hostpital and wonders never get destroyed, barracks we want to destroy to prevent the defenders healing quickly, and sometimes destroying the harbor or airport can cut the beseiged city off from a vital resource ( rubber especially ) so that they are not drafting such good defensive units.

    Robin
     
  9. dialt0ne

    dialt0ne Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2002
    Messages:
    6
    ...
    "Reducing power" of the defenders is not just dependent on the hit points, but also the size of the city. When the pop is <=6, you're in much better shape to mount an assault. But, I can see how destroying city improvements is a pain. I usually have Pyramids and Sun Tzu, so destroying Barracks is usually a plus (can't conscript without a barracks).

    In the Play the World expansion pack (or hopefully a patch that comes out sooner) I believe they have mentioned auto-bombardment. I suspect it will be like Shift-B instead of just B and the artillery will just continue to bombard that square untill it's pointless to do so. I hope something like Control-Shift-B will do a entire-stack-auto-bombard. That way, with "one" key stroke and a nice huge stack of guns you can bring a city to rubble "effortlessly".

    Which then leaves the debate to only is it worth the shields to make artillery. I think so. By the time Replaceable Parts is developed, you are already a good way into the second half of the game. The enemy (ie: all other civs) are either going to be very well entrenched or almost not worth your time. Since they continue to be effective, even against Mech. Inf., I think it's worth it.
     
  10. greenie

    greenie Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2001
    Messages:
    180
    Location:
    Auckland, New Zealand
    The artillery attack is something I've learned and gotten used to in Civ3. Usually at least 4 artillery comes with me during an attack.

    The most important thing for me is to use artillery in an occupation force - they shoot at each unit that attacks - we all know how one hit point can turn the tide of a battle!
     
  11. DeityConquest

    DeityConquest Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2003
    Messages:
    1
    I for one have been using large amounts of Artillery since I first began to understand civ warfare. But know this: The AI may not understand Artillery, but they understand that it is a threat. On Deity about 1200 AD I was embroiled in a war with Greece, I had several forward artilllery postions on the border, to keep Alexanders modern armor out. They consisted of as many as 25 peices per postition. As the war raged, my paranoia grew, I kept adding mech inf to the positions as Alexanders attacks were growing in strength and I didn't want to fight him anyway. Suddenly, he had enough of my Artillery and attacked two positions, each with 12 mech inf and about 25 artillery. I lost both positions, and 50% of my western defence. I put up a glorious fight, destroying as many as 35 modern armor per turn, only Alexander was re-supplying 40 per turn. My loss was spectacular in scale.
     
  12. Sgt.Hellfish

    Sgt.Hellfish King of the Oceans

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2002
    Messages:
    1,672
    Location:
    Manchester, England
    I have recently fought a long campaign against the Vikings, these tactics were put into play , however I went straight into researching flight so had air supperiority. However I lost over 15 infantry and 5 tans even with 10 artialry/battleships and 7 bombers in the area
     
  13. skisphereo

    skisphereo Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2002
    Messages:
    42
    thanks for taking the time to write all that, I'm sure it'll help in my next game
     
  14. puglover

    puglover Disturber of Worldviews

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2002
    Messages:
    9,643
    Location:
    Kansas
    But Infantry needs Rubber :)mad: frustrating on Marla's) that evens the playing field.
     
  15. OmegaMega

    OmegaMega ~Flag Admiral~

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2003
    Messages:
    39
    Location:
    in a cave
    so, what about bombers vs artillery?
     
  16. general Patton

    general Patton Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2003
    Messages:
    15
    Location:
    Houston,tx
    I keep cranking out cavalry and use a infantry, cavalry, artillery combo. Usually 1 infantry for each stack works and then I just raze the city get many workers takes less time. Usually I take a city out in 1 or two turns depending on culture. But always 1 turn of attacking. Ihave about 80 artillery and 264 infantry mostly for city police. I pay nothing in upkeep of army. I now have 75 tanks. I still need arty for veteran infantry and infantry in hills and mountains and for very large cities like 22.
     
  17. MG42 Trooper

    MG42 Trooper Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2004
    Messages:
    4
    Well, I'm against the usage of artillery on the offensive. They aren't exactly easy to transport around enemy territory, and they actually hurt the cities that you are going to capture. By reducing a city and its population to rubble, the city that you take won't be of much use to you. Worse still, you may be depending on it's population defense factor when the AI or players counterattacks.

    As for on the defensive, I can see the point of reducing them before either engaging or defending against them, but with the low probability of hitting them with bombardment, you'll need to even up the odds with more artilleries. I seriously frown on the shield costs of building dozens of artilleries, no matter how cheap they are. Furthermore, I always think they lag up my armies when I'm in the offensive.

    If offensive war during the Replaceable Parts period is so disadvantageous, I believe it'll be wise to wait for tanks. And not waste too much shields on too many artilleries.
     

Share This Page