Invasion Plans

[vmxa1]

I never worry about WW. Even if I am in say an Emperor game playing as a Republic. I will do all I can to end the war in less than 20 turns.

This is not always possible and then I will have to spend more to keep the citizens in check.

In sid games, I will normally go with a gov that has no WW and stay at war for very long stretches. This is common fo rme as they will not make peace without some losses. I may have war declared on me and not fight that civ for a long time.

They will send troops from time to time, but the losses will not seem to bother them. I will not accept peace without a payment as a matter of principle. You must pay a price for it, unless you are hurting me.

Horses or not I do not care for bombardment in an invasion force. Unless you are in a game where you are vastly ahead of the civ you are invading, you just cannot spare slots on ships for cats (cannon, what ever).

At any stage I would rather have an attacker or a defender than a cat. Now if you are attacking civs on your landmass that is different. In that case in an all one move war, go ahead and use them in numbers.

[Melboz99]

I found that in the ancient age or the middle ages it's easy to use cats as defense. In the Industrial it's even easier.

The only catch is that the enemy can't have any fast units. This means that in the ancient and middle ages wars the don't have any horses, and in the industrial era they don't have any oil.

Once you move your 10-20 cats and artillery into a captured city, their slow units will have to advance one square at a time. This is just great if you have cats or artillery, because you can knock them all down before they attack.

For example, say it's the middle ages and they've got 10 longbowman defended by 3 spears, each in it's own stack of 4-5 units.

Simply bombard each stack in turn, such that you will have knocked all the stacks' defenses down equally. Then, take your slow units, longbowman in this case, or a fast unit if you have plenty, and kill off all the defenders and attackers until there is only one unit left in each stack.

The final unit should be taken out by a fast unit, this way he can move back into the city.


When I was playing against the Koreans they dumped about 30-40 longbowman on me defended by about 4-5 spearmen.

The AI's problem was that it couldn't coordinate the attack properly, so it always sent in about 10-15 units at a time.

I simply bombarded the hell out of them as they arrived at the city, and finised them off with my longbowman and calvary.

If you have artillery, you can take them down to one hit point before they even get to your city, and you just finish them off with your calvary or tanks.

Dan O.

[Theseus]

Why bother bombarding Longbows?

[vmxa1]

Dan at most levels you should not be defending with spears vs LB. If you get a no iron game or playing at deity and sid ok. Otherwise I will have better than spears and probably have attackers that will eat LB for lunch. They have a defense of 1 and hence are the same as warriors on defense individually.

Anyway I already said that cats (this is generic) are fine for use on your land mass. It is when you have to invade over water that they become a lux that you cannot afford.

What is the chance that you will have all of these cats in the proper location at the proper time? Only if they are counter attacking a captured city. Mobile attackers are superior as they can get where they are needed and have retreat.

Std map games do not tend to see 20 cats all that often. I cannot recall playing any or reading any in AU matches. There is a reason for this and I have been trying to point it out. Later you wil see larger numbers of arts, but they were probably not all built from scratch and in late game you can make them fast.

In the main I would rather use production for something else, rather than lots of cats. I need to be aquiring horses s they can be used now and can be upgraded later.

[vmxa1]

Come to think about I don't think I have ever had 4 or 5 spears in the same city. Why would I build so many worthless units?

I think many people make too many spears, especially when playing at the first three levels. It is quite ok to not even build a single spear at monarch or less on std maps or larger.

Swords can defend as well as spears and can go on the attack. What is so hateful about spears at levels where barbs are tough is they cannot be used to kill that roving barbs in your radius.

This is not a concern at levels where you have 800/400 or so vs barbs, but as it gets to zero you can't be asured of a win.

[Modo44]

Originally posted by vmxa1
Come to think about I don't think I have ever had 4 or 5 spears in the same city. Why would I build so many worthless units?

For easy upgrades, I guess. And to deter the AI from attacking by making border cities look fortified. I often have 2-4 defenders (depending on the date) in border cities, and only attackers in the others. This is for peaceful games, when I rarely attack first.

Originally posted by vmxa1
Swords can defend as well as spears and can go on the attack. What is so hateful about spears at levels where barbs are tough is they cannot be used to kill that roving barbs in your radius.

Swords defend much worse than Pikes. Again, the upgrade path is important. Perhaps it is different on Sid, but my Spears usually survive to be upgraded. If I get to Mech Infantry, some of them will often be the only Regulars in my army - because they were the first Spears a looong time ago.

The second-best are mounted units, because they upgrade to something useful, and they can react fast. Foot attackers, like Archers and Swordsmen, are not only slow, but become obsolete too quickly for too long. They are good for immediate threats, so not for someone playing peaceful.

Originally posted by vmxa1
This is not a concern at levels where you have 800/400 or so vs barbs, but as it gets to zero you can't be asured of a win.

I prefer Spearmen sitting on rough terrain just outside my borders. Even the barb Horsemen kill themselves very often. You need not hunt them down - you simply use their predictable movements. Just a matter of approach, I think.

[Krill]

How does all of this strategy change if you are invading human opponents, ie in PBEM?

[Krill]

oh, and Modo: That quote is from "The Truth" and is spoken (or atleast thought) by William de Worde, isn't it?

[Modo44]

Originally posted by Krill
How does all of this strategy change if you are invading human opponents, ie in PBEM?

My experience is very limited here. Expect to be surprised, I guess. Something the AI does not provide.

As to the quote, I honestly do not know where Terry Pratchett found it.

[vmxa1]

Originally posted by Modo44

"Swords defend much worse than Pikes. Again, the upgrade path is important. Perhaps it is different on Sid, but my Spears usually survive to be upgraded. If I get to Mech Infantry, some of them will often be the only Regulars in my army - because they were the first Spears a looong time ago."

Ok, I guess so, but we were talking abou spears not pikes. If you are going to be weak compared to them, then by all means make defenders. Otherwise, I do not want to be looking at a bunch of spears to pay for upgrades to pikes, that won't be used.

Then muskets that won't be use, then rifles that won't be used and so on. Better I put it into something else, say attackers that will be used.

Now if you are in a game were you are under pressure right away, again please do make some spears.

The only difference for me at sid is that if they are coming while I have spears, I am dead.

But how about monarch, do I need spears all over the place? Border towns, even when at conflict, I do not need 4 spears. How about 1 and I have attackers instead.

"The second-best are mounted units, because they upgrade to something useful, and they can react fast. Foot attackers, like Archers and Swordsmen, are not only slow, but become obsolete too quickly for too long. They are good for immediate threats, so not for someone playing peaceful. "

No kidding. I am not sure why this was mention, but I am sure we are all aware of the fact. I am pretty sure I have mention my preference for hosres many times. The deal is that you may not have hosres or the tech at that time.

If I have 4 units and they are horses, rather than swords, I may lose that fight. Horses will not win fights that swords will. But that was not really the topic. We were addressing defensive qualities and horses have none, better to have the spears in that case.


"I prefer Spearmen sitting on rough terrain just outside my borders. Even the barb Horsemen kill themselves very often. You need not hunt them down - you simply use their predictable movements. Just a matter of approach, I think."

Well not really. I was talking about a maruader coming into that frontier town. Maybe you have a worker there, the spear is not a reliable unit in that situation. You don't get to sit and wait for it to attack as it won't.

It will kill your worker or force it to go back to the town, it may destroy improvements. It may blockade that tile that had the bonus food and force no growth or worse.

So in the main you made valid points, but they were not on topic for the points being made. You may as well have talked about football as to talk about forted spears on a hill in a reference to spears not being able to stop maruarders. Sorry to be blunt.

[UnOrthOdOx]

Originally posted by Krill
How does all of this strategy change if you are invading human opponents, ie in PBEM?

You don't actually expect me to TELL that do you?


Seriously, I think it's all numbers in the end:

You'll typically either want to be attacking a human earlier by surprise or later with a larger and more diverse force (and possibly ally?).

For instance, I have no qualms taking AI on with 5 archers because I know I'll face 2 spears on defense. Humans, throw all that out and dependant on time period, what civ they are, what is known about the city in question, his troop diposition if known, etc etc.

[vmxa1]

Originally posted by Krill
How does all of this strategy change if you are invading human opponents, ie in PBEM?

Most everything changes in that case. But this is not the PBEM forum, so we ignore MP in most of these conversations.

[Modo44]

Originally posted by vmxa1
"Swords defend much worse than Pikes. Again, the upgrade path is important. Perhaps it is different on Sid, but my Spears usually survive to be upgraded. If I get to Mech Infantry, some of them will often be the only Regulars in my army - because they were the first Spears a looong time ago."

Ok, I guess so, but we were talking abou spears not pikes. If you are going to be weak compared to them, then by all means make defenders. Otherwise, I do not want to be looking at a bunch of spears to pay for upgrades to pikes, that won't be used.

Dan was talking about having Cavalry, so his Spears can very well become Pikes, or even Muskets soon. That potential 3 or 4 defense is their immediate value in his case. He just needs to be told, that upgrading units is important in order to win.

Originally posted by vmxa1
Then muskets that won't be use, then rifles that won't be used and so on. Better I put it into something else, say attackers that will be used.

My units are there to provide numbers, deterring the AI from attacking. Also, they are needed on the borders in case one does a sneak-attack. You always get better value defending with dedicated defenders, because if they die, you lose less shields. Yes, this might be somewhat different if one plays purely offensive. But as soon as you have a stable border, you will need some blockers for it. Those that "do nothing".

Originally posted by vmxa1
But how about monarch, do I need spears all over the place? Border towns, even when at conflict, I do not need 4 spears. How about 1 and I have attackers instead.

2 Spears, 2 or 3 Pikes, 3 or 4 Muskets and better, depending on production capabilities. The AI is often afraid of those defended cities, and will try to get deeper, if it attacks at all. If it does, it will be bypassing targets it could actually take, and exposing its attackers to my attackers, who are hidden deeper in my territory. Works best if border cities get 1-2 bombard units, because they seem to scare the AI even more.

Yes, you can do without defenders, but only if you are absolutely sure the AI will not attack. Either by keeping very good relations, or by attacking it, so that no units get through.

Originally posted by vmxa1
No kidding. I am not sure why this was mention, but I am sure we are all aware of the fact. I am pretty sure I have mention my preference for hosres many times. The deal is that you may not have hosres or the tech at that time.

Then, I will rely on bombard+foot attackers some more. And more dedicated defenders for protection in the field.

Originally posted by vmxa1
If I have 4 units and they are horses, rather than swords, I may lose that fight. Horses will not win fights that swords will. But that was not really the topic. We were addressing defensive qualities and horses have none, better to have the spears in that case.

Basic power of Horsies: they move twice as fast. They might be worse 1:1 against a Sword (might), but I need less to effectively fend off an AI (kill its invasion force), because they are that much more mobile. Also, they can often attack and move to safety, something a Sword cannot. This gets better with Knights, and awesome with Cavalry. So yes, they are second best on defense. Better than foot units IMO.

Originally posted by vmxa1
"I prefer Spearmen sitting on rough terrain just outside my borders. Even the barb Horsemen kill themselves very often. You need not hunt them down - you simply use their predictable movements. Just a matter of approach, I think."

Well not really. I was talking about a maruader coming into that frontier town. Maybe you have a worker there, the spear is not a reliable unit in that situation. You don't get to sit and wait for it to attack as it won't.

It will kill your worker or force it to go back to the town, it may destroy improvements. It may blockade that tile that had the bonus food and force no growth or worse.

Point taken. Distant cities (the outpost kind) are an exception.
Except for Sumeria.

Originally posted by vmxa1
Sorry to be blunt.

Me too.

[vmxa1]

"quote:
Originally posted by vmxa1
If I have 4 units and they are horses, rather than swords, I may lose that fight. Horses will not win fights that swords will. But that was not really the topic. We were addressing defensive qualities and horses have none, better to have the spears in that case.

Basic power of Horsies: they move twice as fast. They might be worse 1:1 against a Sword (might), but I need less to effectively fend off an AI (kill its invasion force), because they are that much more mobile. Also, they can often attack and move to safety, something a Sword cannot. This gets better with Knights, and awesome with Cavalry. So yes, they are second best on defense. Better than foot units IMO."

This is confusing to me agains as I do not see it as relevant to my point. If you just make the statement without my quotes, I would say ok, I can't fight that.

But when you juxtapose with my quote as you did, I wonder what is the relevance? Did I not make a clear point?

If you take it out of context, I concede. If you keep it in context with the point (a outlying town with 4 to 5 spears) being attacked by LB. The horses do not work as they cannot defend against an attack. It was a town being attacked by LB. The defenders cannot retreat. They win or die.

So yes I would rather have swords and 1 spear. Those LB can get killed by my swords. Maybe by the horses, but I would not count on it and I would be in that scenario.

Then you talk about better with knights or calvs and I say why MA? None of those were in the mix at that stage of the game and so all are irrelevent. Its a non sequitur.

The only reason I mention it is 3 times you quoted me and made responses that we fine in and of themselve, but were not responsive to the point. Why include my statements, just make your points, they standalone. They are not wrong, well maybe the part about attacking swords with horses. That would scare me, if they were even numbers and my town was in the balance.

So if I am not stating my case clearly, I am sorry. I do try to make sense, but I have been known to fail at it. Maybe I am not getting what you are saying, but it does not seem to be so much in opposition as it is trying to add in some other concepts.

[diablovision]

I classify my invasion plans into these objectives:

1. Minor expansion; trim enemy borders near me (3-7 cities).
2. Break legs; take down next highest ranked competitor (capture / destroy half of enemy cities).
3. Annihilation; destroy (possibly previously weakened) enemy. (capture all enemy cities, possibly exempting extremely remote cities on distant islands).
4. Acquire resource. (carve a path to resource, 1-4 cities).

For this, I count the number of cities I need to destroy and pick a multiplier for the number of offensive units (not including artillery and defensive units) I will need. You should not expect this multiplier to be less than 5 unless you have a significant tech lead and know their defenders are totally outclassed. I haven't gotten into the hundred+ unit games like other people here, so usually this multipler is between 5 and 10 for me.

Usually I will go with one of three invasion plans;

A. Single big stack (1,2,3,4) to break through at one point. This stack might split off into two directions once the first couple of cities fall.

B. Two or three (2,3) big stacks for a broader entrypoint (overrun the enemy like a flood) and march one direction.

C. Two entrypoints (3), one usually amphibious and one direct over land. This is often needed because I like to sweep up the little towns on outlying islands for completeness sake.


I never let the enemy AI control the sea. The AI generally does not spend enough resources on navy to keep its waters patrolled, and I like to play on Continents and Archipelago. Usually by the industrial and modern ages, I already control my main continent, so there isn't much left to do besides own the sea and invade over mass transports. I use mass submarines, destroyers, carriers, and battleships to destroy all opposing naval forces before attempting landing transports.

On Archipelago, I try to sweep up the islands one by one, which is quite easy in the early modern ages with massed marines. Marines can be one hell of a surprise; sulk off their border with a few transports containing 5-10 marines, declare war, pull up the transport with some destroyers, bomb the sh#t out of the city from 2 or 3 carriers, and invade with marines. Once the city falls, the rest of the transports can dock and unload tanks or modern armor and hit the next ring of cities. What a wake up call for your enemy, eh? Marines from half a world a way showing up on their doorstep and in the first turn 3+ cities fall!

Perhaps my favorite Modus Operandi. I love sneak attacks!