Unit Strengths by Era

[planetfall]

Stuie,

Granted for huge map you may need 40 workers. I have not found any problems with 20 for standard size maps. Often I can work well with 8 to 10 native workers. Usually this is combined with 20-40 slaves.

Have you found redoing tile improvements in conquered terrories after RR's to gain anything at all. Corruption and waste are so high and my games seem to end before any benefit from redoing improvements. The only one's I change is 1) roads to strategic/luxuries, 2) irrigate, and maybe if slow game 3) lumber for 2 culture generators.

-- PF

[Mad Bomber]

PF:

Worker Size is also dependent upon the type of a game you play. 40 workers on a huge map, is sufficient if you are playing a peaceful game, however if you want a substantial empire then a workforce of 40 is clearly insufficent. I typically play conquest games and a work force approaching 300 workers is fairly common. Workers also do more than change terrain and building roads/ railroads. They also can build airfields and radar towers (these become really important in the modern age) as well as outposts and fortifications. When playing on a 200 X 200 map with 23 other civ's to eliminate; spending 250gpt on a workforce is a pittance indeed (my total unit support is in the 1200's by endgame)

[planetfall]

Originally posted by Mad Bomber
PF:

They also can build airfields and radar towers (these become really important in the modern age) as well as outposts and fortifications. When playing on a 200 X 200 map with 23 other civ's to eliminate; spending 250gpt on a workforce is a pittance indeed (my total unit support is in the 1200's by endgame)

Ok, I have not played your game size map nor with 23 civs, so I will take your word for it. On standard size map outposts seem a waste. With fewer than 12 civs, I have only a couple of times found value in fortifications. The Marriott line didn't hold and I don't rely on fortications to hold.

Which is a better value for cost:
A-- capture city, rush temple, airport, lib, barracks, or
B-- capture city and build airfield outside city?

Since airfields can't have Radar Towers, they seem like too much of a target. At least with cities, I can have defensive values.

Radar is helpful, but if I have to rely on Radar; I really screwed up the game play earlier.

I don't always play a peaceful game. I used to have more workers to hurry up improvements in newly conquered territories. But then finally realized, they were not helping me eough. Waste and corruption killed the effectiveness of any city captured after 1300 AD. Now my style is to only keep cities with a strategic or needed luxury resource or key geographical location. I close down the rest and concentrate on a larger military.

But then, always open to hearing alternative strategics for playing this game.


-- PF

[alexman]

Die finally, silly obsolete thread!


I can't believe a two-year old thread is proudly showcased at the top of this forum!

[planetfall]

Yeah!! Go figure. At least we are talking about C3 and not C2.

You know the solutions:
--add value to another thread
--open a new better thread
--change your thread sort preferences


-- PF

[Mad Bomber]

PF:

Yes, outposts are pitiful; but the true value of Airfields and Radar towers become apparent when lauching intercontinental invasions in which you cannot land all of your forces in one turn (how many of us happen to have 50-60 transports lying around?) . Airfields also make reinforcement and follow on forces proceed more rapidly to your initially vulnerable beachhead. Rt's I tend to build whenever there is a slack in the tempo of combat operations or if a civ has a modern military in which RT' s will give a slight edge to my forces. Finally for defensive purposes, build the airfield on a hill or mountain and supply it with a few good defenders. Airfields are also good on one tile islands in which you do not want to build a city on.

[planetfall]

Originally posted by Mad Bomber
Finally for defensive purposes, build the airfield on a hill or mountain and supply it with a few good defenders. Airfields are also good on one tile islands in which you do not want to build a city on.

And Alexman wonders why we continue with old threads. You just supplied a new idea for the day. THANK YOU.

I missed the options of building an airfield on mt or 1 tile island. I'm going to have to give a Mt top airfield a try!

And yet a beachhead only needs 2 workers for conversion to RT.

No I don't use 50-60 transports, but I will use 5-10 for normandy invasions. Closer military in MA means more defensive units are required. Sometimes 40 units are not enough to hold a footing for the 3-4 turns until reinforcements are needed.


Hummmm, if use airfield, I would be able to get reinforcements in a few turns and would not have to worry about city flipping. Hummmmm.
Turn 1-- land, Turn 2-- airfield, Turn 3-- reinforcements. Hmmmm. Yep, that is better than: Turn 1-- land, Turn 2-- conquer city, Turn 3-- rush temple;
Turn 4-- run Library/barracks, Turn 5-- rush airport; Turn 6-- reinforcements start arrriving. Ok you convinced me, change in play is needed.


I also don't need a ton of airfields. One airport/airfield on foreign continent
does quite well. With RR's who needs more?

-- PF

[Mad Bomber]

PF:

One last point on airfields:

Using a worker for the airfield instead of rushing it in a city allows you to use the airfield on the same turn instead of waiting for the next turn when you rush. So in your example it would be

Turn one: Land (one worker needed in transport)
Turn two: Sacrifice worker for airfield, reinforce beachead.

[geniemalin]

Originally posted by Last Conformist
Something I definitely wants back, preferably in developed form, is SMAC's system where mobile units got a bonus in open terrain, and infantry in bases (cities). That 1800s-style Riflemen are outclassed by Cav in open terrain is odd, but that the Cav are vastly better at capturing fortified cities is outrightly ridiculous.

There were quite a few SMAC features that would have been nice to see in CivIII (maybe we'll see them in CivIV?) but the way in which terrain and mobility interacted was one of the best.

Yes, CivIII does give higher attack value to mobile units and higher defence value to infantry (whereas the base offensive value of a SMAC unit just depended on its weapon) but as noted that unhistorically makes mobile units the ideal choice to capture cities!

Elevation affecting bombardment and/or artillery duels would be another nice feature to implement.

Of course, I probably should just go all the way and plug build-your-own-unit and build-your-own-political-system too

[planetfall]

Originally posted by Mad Bomber
PF:

One last point on airfields:

So in your example it would be

Turn one: Land (one worker needed in transport)
Turn two: Sacrifice worker for airfield, reinforce beachead.

WOW 3 times faster!!!

I am playing my first huge map with 16 civs. This will definitely make landings easier.

Thanks.

-- PF

[Brundlefly]

Originally posted by planetfall


Ok, I have not played your game size map nor with 23 civs, so I will take your word for it. On standard size map outposts seem a waste. With fewer than 12 civs, I have only a couple of times found value in fortifications. The Marriott line didn't hold and I don't rely on fortications to hold.

Which is a better value for cost:
A-- capture city, rush temple, airport, lib, barracks, or
B-- capture city and build airfield outside city?

-- PF

I would take choice 'A'. Always go for infrastructure.

[planetfall]

Originally posted by Feephi


I would take choice 'A'. Always go for infrastructure.

I am now convinced to go for choice B.

I have had a couple of games where I lost the first landing It is way way too annoying to lose a force of 30 units. If you have reinforcements, you can
build cities and infrastructure. For me the key to a successful invasion, is being able to survive the first waves of counter attack, and develop a foothold.

6 turns for infrastructure vs 2 turns for airfield is too great of an advantage not to skip. Bottom line is building 2 cities is no good if you lose both of them within a couple turns.

-- PF

[Theseus]

Airfields ROCK... for IC invasions, the entire troop complement that is built during transit can be delivered to the battle field one turn after landing.

[planetfall]

Originally posted by Theseus
Airfields ROCK... for IC invasions, the entire troop complement that is built during transit can be delivered to the battle field one turn after landing.

I tried first this weekend. Only caveat is they must be in neutral or owned territory for you lose them {and the forces on them????}. IC was sooooo much easier and less stressful. On a huge map I was concerned how it would work out.
No problem.

The ability to quickly reinforce also opens up more landing zones. No longer essential to have a hill city tile or to have radar towers next door. Now can plan IC landing zone based on which is more important: terrain defensive advantages or resource capture.

Again thanks all for the correcting of my strategy.

-- PF

[Arrian]

Wow, that tactic never occurred to me. I typically would either be invading earlier in the game (using the tried and true "land on a hill with a settler & damn near my entire army" approach) or I would get a foothold in peacetime by exploiting a gap or two in the AI's cultural borders after a war - thus giving me time to rushbuild all the necessary improvements.

-Arrian