Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

To Pillage or not to Pillage

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    I don't use it much, but as has been listed in this thread, there are definitely times when a pillage or two is a good idea, especially if you are working against a military or economic disadvantage.

    However, I have used pillage another way, to prevent foregn development. An example: I was going for the Space Race. I had done a decent REX and a couple of small wars to gain a goodly amount of territory. I now have an empire big enough to reasonably work up the tech tree. However, I have several slightly smaller neighbors on the map and they are all trading techs and catching up to me. Hmmm. They are all democracies. They need a good war to slow them down. I set up a web of MPP's and start a world war against a goodly size opponent. Because I am prepared for the war, I have offensive squads ready to pour into enemy territory. My "allies" come flooding in as well. I work like crazy to get the cities while my "allies" tend to do skirmish work with wandering enemy troops. Everybody is, of course, looking to expand territory. Everybody but me. Those extra cities aren't really going to help my core and corruption levels. I don't really want them. But I don't want the other civs to get any use out of them, either. So I keep the new cities, for a while. The war ends with the death of the selected target civ. A couple of cities have fallen to my allies, but I have most of the area. I then take my invasion and garrison troops and have each of them lay waste to the tiles in that city radius and then in any unclaimed tiles not yet in cultural boundaries. (This is especially true for tiles that will fall into a city's 21 square working area when its first expansion happens.) I leave one roadway open all the way back to my established borders, abandon all those cities and then head home, pillaging the final road behind me. The land is available for setlers and all that, but it will take forever to develop into anything useful at all. Meanwhile, I have all my invasion troops reinforcing my borders and thinking evil thoughts about yet another neighbor.

    It's an expansion of General Sherman's techniques in the US Civil War, a big expansion since he wasn't quite so thorough. There are two ways of looking at it: Either I have created a vast wasteland, or I have created a pristine nature preserve devoid of the taint of civilization. Either way, it is a pain for others to do anything with, and it becomes a breeding ground for barbarians and that can slow down
    foreign development, too. Fun!

    Some people pillage, then conquer. I conquer, then pillage. I am either backwards, or very strange, or both.
    If you aren't confused,
    You don't understand.

    Comment


    • #17
      [SIZE=1] Assaulting cites (as opposed to towns) is one thing on levels that you will have the better units and anotgher when you will have the same or maybe inferior units.
      Cities, towns whatever I was approximating!! I see your point about the difficulty level - I'm not one of the hardcore players round here (too busy!! ) so i'll usually play monarch or emperor games.
      "Bite my shiny metal ass" - Bender B. Rodriguez

      Comment


      • #18
        Yeah I say cities often, when I should say town. It makes a big difference in attacking as the defensive bonus changes at those points.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: To Pillage or not to Pillage

          Originally posted by psumbody
          How many Players rely heavily on pillaging to weaken the AI? I normally do not pillage when I am at war. My reasoning is I want to capture an enemy city with little or no damage to the tile improvements. I would hate to send an army of workers to rebuild the improvements I just pillaged.
          I sometimes pillage if I do not intend to take the enemy's land. it also works as a diversionary tactic. Sending a few units deep into enemy territory to slow the reinforcements to the front line.

          But it's not something I do a lot. Often I do go to war to conquer enemy territory.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Aeson
            Sid is the only difficulty I wouldn't recommend pillaging at the start. You can 'beat' a Sid AI in a pillage war, but they get to Writing so fast, and are so much stronger from the get go, that it usually ends up multiple alliances against you and/or very expensive peace treaty. Once you get an Army on Sid, pillaging becomes possible.
            Is there any reason to believe that pillaging makes an AI more likely to sign alliances against you, or are you just saying that an early state of war is risky due to the AI's attitude towards you taking the hit?
            Consul.

            Back to the ROOTS of addiction. My first missed poll!

            Comment


            • #21
              Just being at war.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by vmxa1
                Pillaging is like many of the tools in the game, you don't need it all the time, but it does have many applications.

                Assaulting cites (as opposed to towns) is one thing on levels that you will have the better units and anotgher when you will have the same or maybe inferior units.

                This is why the level is important. You will probably always have equal or superior troops at Monarch and maybe even Emp, but it starts to change after that.

                You may be equal, you may be superior or you may not. If you are not and going after cities with possibly scores of defenders you want all the help you can get.
                then leave their cities in ruin
                Gurka 17, People of the Valley
                I am of the Horde.

                Comment


                • #23
                  My decision to pillage is based on roughly one thing,...the size of my enemy.

                  (1) Smaller civs - simply blitz through, no pillaging.

                  (2) Same size civ - pillage strategic & luxury resources to cripple ability to wage war and disrupt their existing trades.

                  (3) Larger civs - pillage the countryside, to do #2 plus reduce city size throiugh starvation.
                  "What did you learn in school today, dear little boy of mine?
                  I learned our government must be strong. It's always right and never wrong,.....that's what I learned in school."
                  --- Tom Paxton song ('63)

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    I ussually do not bother pillaging, unless I am playing a civ that is fit to do so, such as the Zulu.
                    I also agree with Aeson, it is really only useful on high difficulties when you are really struggling to catch up.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      In certain situations pillaging can be a very useful tactic. This is a Sid game and on the mini-map you’ll note my English empire in orange in the upper center. I’m busy pruning down the Americans in blue. The red Byzantines, my MPP partners, are too far away to invade yet but they must be dealt with shortly as they are the world leaders in every measure and so I’ve a powerful pillaging force ready to destroy their core, slow their production/development, and give them a reason to give me a bundle for peace after I’m finished pillaging them. Hopefully this will buy me enough time to fight my way to a reasonable invasion staging area or pull enough ahead in tech to get the win.
                      Attached Files
                      Last edited by Drachen; June 21, 2004, 22:35.
                      The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread.

                      Anatole France

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        How do you plan to survive long enough to do some damage? Rely on the AIs tendency to avoid armies like the plague?



                        Have to try this tactic in my current game btw I'm playing a rather relaxed game where I'm NOT conquering everything in sight at first opportunity. The persians are annoying me now, how about popping over to their continent, capturing their capital, disband it and then sue for peace?

                        They got two wonders there btw
                        Don't eat the yellow snow.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by bongo
                          How do you plan to survive long enough to do some damage? Rely on the AIs tendency to avoid armies like the plague?
                          Exactly, an explorer can move through three tiles and pillage one of them. I will send out 3 explorers with each army and they will come to rest under the shelter of the army at the end of each turn. The armies move and pillage also but never attack anything but workers and these are disbanded upon capture. If my armies stay away from bombard units I can keep them going until flight. I’ve never checked to see if the AI would bomb an army on their turf but I suspect they would. If I make peace then I reload the pillagers on the ships or get a ROP in the treaty.
                          The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread.

                          Anatole France

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Drachen
                            ... If my armies stay away from bombard units I can keep them going until flight. I’ve never checked to see if the AI would bomb an army on their turf but I suspect they would...
                            Isn't the AI also totally clueless on using artillery? And armies heal in hostile territory?

                            Sounds like an exploit but I am willing to forgive almost anything when a guy tries to win at sid
                            Don't eat the yellow snow.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              If your army gets too close to an enemy city then any artillery there will fire. If that happens enough times before battlefield medicine then it’s possible that your army could be attacked so I pay attention to enemy artillery.

                              Some very good players argue that using armies at all is an exploit. What about artillery stacks? Is that an exploit? I just choose to play the game the way the rules allow and be honest about what I’m doing. If other players wish to take on Sid without these benefits then I wish them all the best and cheer them on.
                              The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread.

                              Anatole France

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Armies will heal in hostile territory even before battlefield medicine.
                                Don't eat the yellow snow.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X