Fighting Workers

[Solomwi]

I wish I had thought to grab a screenshot, but I just had a unit gain elite status by defeating... a worker.

I'm playing a game with the AU mod, and using a stack of Special Forces, which have stealth attack, to take a city. When I attacked, I saw a worker listed in the potential target list, so I had to test it. Well, the unit sits there and fires for a few seconds (enough for me to worry that I had trapped it in an unendable scenario, and would have to restart), then the worker dies, and if the RNG pleases, you get promoted. Presumably, you can also get a leader this way.

[Xorbon]

That's interesting. I suppose someone could make an anti-artillery unit in much the same way then.

[Solomwi]

Good thought. Since you can specify the allowed targets for stealth-attack units, I don't see why an anti-artillery unit couldn't be created.

[Modo44]

Originally posted by Solomwi
Good thought. Since you can specify the allowed targets for stealth-attack units, I don't see why an anti-artillery unit couldn't be created.

You call it a Tank. Their speed was often used to crush through to destroy artillery emplacements. I have little knowledge if there was something similar earlier on...

[Tattila the Hun]

Eh, I remember this happening in some mod... They actually hit you with the shovel, IIRC...

[joncnunn]

The classic artillery emplacement destroyer was Calvary charging them from the rear.

A varient was calvary charging artilery caught limbered up that wouldn't be able to unlimber in time.

Another anti-artilery tactic was to have infentry in skirmish forminations creep up to within the range of the inf firing weapons and have the inf fire on the crew of the artillery.

All of these tactics when succesful resulted in capturing the artillery pieces.

Other Artillery was also fired upon artillery, in this case the target was usually the artilery pieces themselves. So a hit would disable an enemy piece and a near miss was also often okay: disabled crew member of the aritllery.

WW I Tanks were primitive and not generally used against Artillery, indeed they were more of a psychological warfare weapon than anything else. And fully 50% of them could be expected to break down all on their own when used.

At times some WW II Tanks were armored well enough to charge directly against artillery type units with insufficent shells. (The obsolete aritlery from WW I) But up against a WW II artillery type piece [which also doubled as anti-air defenses] it was much better to try to charge from the rear.

Originally posted by Modo44

You call it a Tank. Their speed was often used to crush through to destroy artillery emplacements. I have little knowledge if there was something similar earlier on...

[Modo44]

Originally posted by joncnunn
At times some WW II Tanks were armored well enough to charge directly against artillery type units with insufficent shells. (The obsolete aritlery from WW I) But up against a WW II artillery type piece [which also doubled as anti-air defenses] it was much better to try to charge from the rear.

Uh, I meant howitzers kind or artillery, not AA+AP cannons like the 88. Those monsters were of special design, and special function, unlike the regular ones. Or are you saying a 105mm howitzer could be used as an anti-tank cannon for short-range fire?

And yes, the usual tactic against Artillery is to get into firing range unnoticed. How effective were those Cavalry tactics?

[Solomwi]

Originally posted by Modo44

You call it a Tank. Their speed was often used to crush through to destroy artillery emplacements. I have little knowledge if there was something similar earlier on...

Enough with the historical accuracy bit, I'm thinking about the technical aspects here. Besides, tanks never had stealth attack.

[Modo44]

Originally posted by Solomwi
Besides, tanks never had stealth attack.

I think they do, very much so, but I guess it depends on the scale. If you take divisions into account, Tanks would be the only ones able to push through hard enough to get to specific targets and elliminate them. All those precision strikes done by foot soldiers happen on a scale far smaller than the one of Civ. In this game, I would say any fast-moving units should be able to pull this off. Add Guerillas to it if you want.

The technical aspect has been covered already, no?

[Solomwi]

Originally posted by Modo44

I think they do, very much so, but I guess it depends on the scale. If you take divisions into account, Tanks would be the only ones able to push through hard enough to get to specific targets and elliminate them. All those precision strikes done by foot soldiers happen on a scale far smaller than the one of Civ. In this game, I would say any fast-moving units should be able to pull this off. Add Guerillas to it if you want.

The technical aspect has been covered already, no?

They still have to push through, though. The spirit of stealth attack is that the unit bypasses the others, rather than push through. At least that's how I've always seen it.

Perhaps it has been covered. My post was simply to the effect that, in the editor, it's possible to create a unit that can do nothing but eliminate artillery from stacks/cities before other units attack. There are some intriguing possibilities here, though nothing I'd want in an epic-game mod.

[joncnunn]

Depended heavilly upon the skills of the generals in both armies.

And if the defender also had Cavalry that would pretty much preclude the oppertunity for an attackers Cavalry to outflank the defender.

It was much more typical to capture artillery pieces from units that was fleeing the scene. (Because the inf units in front of it had been routed.)

Originally posted by Modo44

And yes, the usual tactic against Artillery is to get into firing range unnoticed. How effective were those Cavalry tactics?