Maginot lines

[Chemical Ollie]

Do you use them? How, when and why?

I usually start to build them in the age of riflemen and grenadiers, at choke points or at my borders, to prevent sneak attacks or to simply keep the enemy out of my land during war. 2-3 units in each tile, of various types to provide combined arms, and upgrades to fit the type of terrain in the tile. I also build forts if the tile is outside my city limits.

The enemy usually sends his Stack of Doom(TM) to attack the weakest point of the line. But he usually suffers far more casualties than he can inflict, and with some reserves behind the lines, I can fill the gaps on the next turn.

Then I keep the line and send my Stack of Doom(TM) in front of it, to attack a city or to just rape and plunder all the enemy's improvements. If I gain territory, I may move the line forwards. That will normally screw up the unit specialisation (woodsmen, guerilla etc), but by then the enemy is normally weaker and won't attack my line anyway.

[johnmcd]

If I have a single tile choke point with a serious nut case AI then I'll put down a stack on it, otherwise, I tend to respond to attack. I tend to build lots of culture in border towns so I almost always have a three or four tile barrier against sneak attacks. When I don't, I'll consider having a frontier army of some kind, or, more likely, if I have the troops to spare on an frontier force I'll be declaring war, not him.

[joncnunn]

A true Maginot line is even worse a defensive tactic in Civ IV than in real life.

In addition to leaving yourself wide open for attackers going thru neutral countries to bypass your Maginot line, in CIV IV (unlike reality) there is no limit on how many units can be stacked in a single tile. This results in a hole being punched thru your lines as you can not be strong enough in every tile along it to prevent it.

A much better Civ IV defensive tactic is the killing fields tactic.

[Theben]

It depends on terrain and whether or not I can afford an army at the time. A wide open plains/grasslands border usually gets defended at the city, while hills or forests get specialized defenders running thru them, archers/longbowmen or axemen/macemen. I also tend to have a high culture so my borders are usually enough to blunt any initial enemy charge to prepare a defense.

[LzPrst]

depends a lot on the situation. occasionally I'll station some garrisons at chokepoints, if my workers dont have much to do I'll throw up some forts, though I rarely if ever rely on it as any reliable defence. even the AI will use amph.assaults these days and may bypass your great defence altogether.

joncnunn, could you please elaborate on what you mean by "killing fields tactic"?

[Fleme]

I've tried this to some extent, when my cultural borders have extended 2 tiles beyond my BFC I've sometimes built forts every 3 tiles, leaving 2 empty tiles between each fort, effectively forming a solid "Zone of Control" along my border, so to speak. This is yet to serve any real strategic purpose but has kept me entertained a number of times when I've had my workers improve the bordering terrain that's not used by anyone and then have my cities train units to garrison in the forts (3-5 each, rifles and cannons or equivalents).

For strategy, it's best to form your garrison on a hill or a forest along the route your enemy is most likely to take. Offense is always the best defense and since the AI more often than not will go around your forts (unless they're on a choke or the AI "feels" like pummeling the fort) so it's good to make the AI choose paths that will leave it without a defensive bonus and therefore vulnerable to your defensive force to destroy it.

[Quillan]

Assuming you have dead space between you and your neighbor, meaning territory that's within your cultural border but outside your city's fat cross, I like to build quick improvements like farms and mines there. They don't produce anything, but an invader will separate from the stack-o'-doomÂâ„¢ in order to pillage. This buys time and allows you to pick off some of the enemy. I never use the static defense, unless I have a choke point, and even then the AI is prone to going around by ship with the BtS expansion.

[LzPrst]

looking at your signature Quillan, I wonder at how well you know old man Deity?

[Quillan]

If you're asking at what difficulty level I usually play, I'm generally playing on Prince, and still struggling to master it. I was getting pretty good there before BtS; the AI improvements have made it much harder for me.

If you're asking about my actual age, I'm someplace in between the "Age and treachery" and "youth and skill" categories. I just turned the same age as the answer to the Ultimate Question.

[Hauptman]

I do use the maginot line tactic, but mainly ONLY on one city chalanges. I had Monty as my southern neighbor in my last occ. I had a straight line of hills or jungles about 6 or 7 squares long. 2 units in each forward fort used up ALL his catapults each time he attacked. Yes I'd loose the 2 units, but it was so worth it for the damage they did to him. I had a nice clear area behind the line with a couple of hill forts to attack his stacks from once he moved in further. He never made it to my city.

[Chemical Ollie]

Originally posted by joncnunn
A true Maginot line is even worse a defensive tactic in Civ IV than in real life.

In addition to leaving yourself wide open for attackers going thru neutral countries to bypass your Maginot line ---

When I build them, I build them along all my borders, not only towards the most hostile enemy. There is no such thing as "neutral" territory, even your best friend will sign open borders with your enemies or stab your back when you least expect it. I consider all AI as hostile (perhaps that why I never win any diplomatic victories).

[johnmcd]

Originally posted by Chemical Ollie


When I build them, I build them along all my borders, not only towards the most hostile enemy. There is no such thing as "neutral" territory, even your best friend will sign open borders with your enemies or stab your back when you least expect it. I consider all AI as hostile (perhaps that why I never win any diplomatic victories).

At emperor and above that's probably a fair assumption, but below that, there are AIs you can trust. It sounds like you're probably wasting a fortune in production and maintenance to address a threat that often won't exist.

Balance your garrisons to your hostile neighbours by all means, but I really would save on soldiers from what you are describing.

[joncnunn]

Killing fields basically is you attack the AI SoD in your territory on soft terraign at the place and time of your own choosing.

Normally this involves sufficent cultural depth so the AI can't reach your vitals and also a sufficent road network so you can move units much faster than SoD can.

This is often argumented by pre-war positioning of troops to encourage the AI to choose that particular route.

Originally posted by LzPrst

joncnunn, could you please elaborate on what you mean by "killing fields tactic"?

[joncnunn]

The only thing worse than one Maginot line is the Maginot polygon. If indeed only attacked from one direction it may be a few turns even with rails to relocate 1/2 your army from the wrong borders.

I might also mention even if an AI is on your side of the war against the enemy AI, sometimes the enemy AI invades you thru them.

Originally posted by johnmcd

At emperor and above that's probably a fair assumption, but below that, there are AIs you can trust. It sounds like you're probably wasting a fortune in production and maintenance to address a threat that often won't exist.

Balance your garrisons to your hostile neighbours by all means, but I really would save on soldiers from what you are describing.

[LzPrst]

Quillan. I see you've read your guide, good to know. but no, I was referring specifically to a poster/civplayer on these forums who goes by the name Deity. his signature is... remarkably similar to your own, though with a slight other twist.

look for him in the diplogame threads in multiplayer (or just search for him)