On the Utility and Use of Marines

[Christantine The Great]

Wow, almost a year since I last posted here...

---

Not to offend, but I believe that the marines are intended to clear beaches, not take cities by force. A diagram:

O=ocean
U=random land unit
C=city (heavily fortified)

OOOOOO
OOOOOO
UUUCUUU

The only way to attack this city without major losses is to land armor and artillery, right? Well, the coast is fortified with tons of trash units, like warriors. You can bombard until the end of the world, but you aren't going to kill them. This is where marines come in. They can clear the beaches so you can land troops.

[Catt]

Originally posted by Blitzer
Not much can deal with a pair of 4-stacks of infantry, in an army, in a mountain. Yes the AI threw a TON of crap at it, but it held firm. Mind you this is before the AI has tanks... mostly cavalry and infantry with the odd swordsman thrown in. Have yet to test with a tank-equipped defender, if the AI gets tanks I generally just build the spaceship, and I don't build many of those .

Interesting. I have landed a transport full (8) of infantry on mountains, with my attackers (tanks, cavalry + artillery) "protected" underneath, and not only did my infantry fall, but most of the attackers fell as well! Nothing like loading those artillery back onto a transport to avoid capture! Of course, if you are able to easily out-produce the AI, and you have superior weaponry, then tactics and strategy have a lot less meaning -- just overwhelm them with force of numbers and force of technological superiority.

Was just a regular ole city (albiet size 23 and with a luxury and a wonder).

Sorry, marines suck =(. Avoiding the city defense bonus like we thought would pretty well balance them. A Coastal fortress could restore the bonus. Someone feedback it to Firaxis, I can hardly see marines becoming unbalanced through this change.

Well, I still think marines are a very effective (and woefully underutilized) tool, but to each his own -- we all have our quirks when it comes to gameplay, which is what will make MP fun.

Originally posted by Christantine The Great
Not to offend, but I believe that the marines are intended to clear beaches, not take cities by force [ . . . .] The only way to attack this city without major losses is to land armor and artillery, right? Well, the coast is fortified with tons of trash units, like warriors. You can bombard until the end of the world, but you aren't going to kill them. This is where marines come in. They can clear the beaches so you can land troops.

First, no offense taken . I wouldn't post it if I feared someone might disagree (especially when posting on the utility of marines ). And perhaps you're right -- that the game designers intended marines to be used as beach clearers. However, while I haven't seen the AI assault one of my cities with marines off a transport, others report having seen it, but I haven't heard anyone report AI marines being used to create a landing zone. (I think nearly everyone has seen the AI build marines when it doesn't have oil and therefore can't build tanks).

Second, this usage may be more true in MP -- while I see AI units (seemingly) randomly fortified all over the place, I haven't seen any evidence of a deliberate attempt by the AI to block landing parties. And I am just as likely to see infantry fortified here and there as I am to see, old out-dated units that, under HI, might clearly be there as "beach-blockers." Do you run into a "block landing zone" strategy from the AI with any regularity?

Catt

[Pythagoras]

Originally posted by Christantine The Great
Wow, almost a year since I last posted here...

---

Not to offend, but I believe that the marines are intended to clear beaches, not take cities by force. A diagram:

O=ocean
U=random land unit
C=city (heavily fortified)

OOOOOO
OOOOOO
UUUCUUU

The only way to attack this city without major losses is to land armor and artillery, right? Well, the coast is fortified with tons of trash units, like warriors. You can bombard until the end of the world, but you aren't going to kill them. This is where marines come in. They can clear the beaches so you can land troops.

I dont think Ive ever encountered the AI performing this defensive tactic. Even if you did clear the shoreline and land a force to take the city, your troops would still suffer from the counter attack of every unit the civ could get there. So why not just 'screw' those other units and go straight for the city with its defensive bonus?

[Blitzer]

Interesting. I have landed a transport full (8) of infantry on mountains, with my attackers (tanks, cavalry + artillery) "protected" underneath, and not only did my infantry fall, but most of the attackers fell as well!

Were you being attacked by tanks? For my second continental invasion of the above game, I planted a pair of 3x tank + 1x mech inf on a hill and the AI hit it with roughly 40 some infantry and cavalry. I didn't lose a single unit. I can see where tanks would tilt the odds somewhat, but the key really is the army. The AI does not get lucky 18 hits in a row very often.

I've gone over my invasion strategy in another thread, but maybe it bears repeating. Timeline for invasion is the turn before I discover Motorized Transportation. Invasion force varies, but generally I will bring:

Transport 1: 4 Infantry (Army), 3 Armies (empty)
Transport 2: 4 Cavalry (Army), 3 Artillery
Transport 3: 4 Infantry, 4 Cavalry
2 Battleships

Land said force in a mountain. The AI will hit you with everything he has... Longbowmen, Infantry, Swordsmen, whatever. I've absolutely never had my army die. Sometimes the buffer Infantry will die, but the AI is stupid enough to charge that mountain instead of reinforcing the city as a player would do.

The next turn you bomb 5 times and then hit the city with the cavalry army to wear down the first 1-2 defenders and then the cavalry and infantry. I leave one infantry in the mountain to save the artillery if he can, but the rest move into the city.

The AI has little left to take the city, and on your subsequent turn you should have quelled all the resistance in the city. Now rush an airport. Your core cities are now cranking our tanks, and are airport equipped themselves... land the tanks in the new city and voila... instant invasion force. I've also rushed the airport a turn early with a surplus leader... but it's rare that I have spares lying around . You can rush with a leader while the city is in resistance though... so if need be know it can be done.

Admittedly, if your opponent beats you to tanks, perhaps this isn't the best idea... but generally speaking if you got the TOE and have been having a good game to that point, you should have a 2-3 tech lead anyway. I've had AI civs hit tanks before, but not very often... I tend to take them out before they have a chance to be a burr under my saddle.

[Christantine The Great]

I'm thinking more in the terms of playing against humans when the expansion comes out. I've never encountered intelligence from the AI so I don't ever expect to see that little manuver made by them.

Remember, I said the city was heavily fortified. That could mean lots and lots of mech inf and a coastal battery. Maybe even a ship or two.

[nbarclay]

Marines in the real world DO NOT engage in amphibious assaults directly against well-defended cities. Rather, they go after a relatively undefended stretch of beach to establish a beachhead to bring in heavier forces.

The reason marines are used so rarely in Civ 3 is that there is almost always undefended beach available to land on without having to use them. Thus, their rightful role of securing a beachhead to bring in heavier forces is denied them.

One option for Civ 4 might be to give all beach tiles a certain amount of defense against amphibious invasion in the industrial and modern ages whether they have units on them or not (with the level of defense increasing with various technologies). Mounted and armored units could not attack beaches at all. Non-marine foot units could, but with attack values at 25% of normal. Only marines could storm even "undefended" beaches without expecting significant casualties.

As for the Civ 3 version of marines, I've toyed with the idea of using marines to take a city and then landing heavy forces of panzers or modern armor in the city to blitz neighboring cities the same turn, but I've never had a game situation where it made sense to try it out. I don't like invading foreign continents unless I have an overwhelming advantage, in which case I don't need marines badly enough to "waste" time I could be investing in other technologies. Maybe if an AI researches it for me someday (and if the AIs survive long enough when I'm playing for domination ).

Nathan

[Radiation Zero]

Originally posted by nbarclay
The reason marines are used so rarely in Civ 3 is that there is almost always undefended beach available to land on without having to use them. Thus, their rightful role of securing a beachhead to bring in heavier forces is denied them.

Well, that's true, but I think that's also because if you want a unit to 'secure' a land tile for you, you want a defensive unit. And the defense values of Marines on bare ground just ins't horribly fun. Marines in Civ are meant to take, not hold, and if they take a city, it's much easier to hold it with something else than a bare tile is.

Originally posted by nbarclay
One option for Civ 4 might be to give all beach tiles a certain amount of defense against amphibious invasion in the industrial and modern ages whether they have units on them or not (with the level of defense increasing with various technologies). Mounted and armored units could not attack beaches at all. Non-marine foot units could, but with attack values at 25% of normal. Only marines could storm even "undefended" beaches without expecting significant casualties.

Yes, that would force people to use Marines for a large stretch of the game, but I don't think this way is best.
I think air power should have more effect on defense at this point of the game. Perhaps another unit command called 'Patrol' or something, where a unit could give up it's own defense (it would not be able to defend it's own tile, or at a much reduced value) but would be able to 'defend' the area around itself at a slightly lower number. This would make buil building a large, defensive military , air force and navy attractive, and would make small, dense empires more difficult to invae, forcing weakening tactics, stealth raids, that kind of thing.

Originally posted by nbarclay
As for the Civ 3 version of marines, I've toyed with the idea of using marines to take a city and then landing heavy forces of panzers or modern armor in the city to blitz neighboring cities the same turn, but I've never had a game situation where it made sense to try it out. I don't like invading foreign continents unless I have an overwhelming advantage, in which case I don't need marines badly enough to "waste" time I could be investing in other technologies. Maybe if an AI researches it for me someday (and if the AIs survive long enough when I'm playing for domination ).

Really? It's usually my main tactic.
I just find that capturing cities amphibiously then holding them is, for me, the quickest, and if not easiest, then most predictable way of doing it.

Some good ideas, I just want to see more variety added to Civ.. variety, but not burdening the AI with cray amounts of choices like SMAC.

[Meldor]

My uses for marines.....

I will admit that I rarely use marines......that said however they have their uses.

If you have a map that has one and two square islands, you have to use nukes or marines. No other choice. Most of the time on two square islands the AI will have a unit on the second square. For one square islands the only assualt is with marines.

As has been pointed out before, a well defended city must be softened up before it is assualted. If you attack a size 21 city, better first to bomb it back to size 6 and then assualt. After natioanlism they are mostly useless anyway.

[dunk]

I have moded marines to be cheaper to build. I made all the infantry units from musketmen on to be cheaper. Musketmen 40, riflemen 50, infantry 60, marines and paratroopers 70 with 9-7-1 and 7-9-1 respectively.

[Catt]

Originally posted by Blitzer
Were you being attacked by tanks? [ . . . . ] Admittedly, if your opponent beats you to tanks, perhaps this isn't the best idea... but generally speaking if you got the TOE and have been having a good game to that point, you should have a 2-3 tech lead anyway. I've had AI civs hit tanks before, but not very often... I tend to take them out before they have a chance to be a burr under my saddle.

I like to take them out before they get under the saddle as well , just can't always do so. I've had problems when the AI has tanks, but have also had the AI just throw 70+ infantry, riflemen, etc. at a mountain. My 8 infantry will all be promoted to elite . . . before they die. Granted, this is often a great trade -- my 8 units for about 40 - 50 AI units.

I suspect I should have been clearer in my first post. I believe that the use of marines is a very effective tactic against an AI that is roughly at the the human's tech level / production capability / etc. - maybe a little behind, maybe a little ahead. If I have a 2-3 tech lead and can outproduce the AI, then I don't need (and suspect few would) any particular tactic - just hit 'em with more and better units! Your invasion force sounds almost unstoppable -- but it sounds like you already have the power to crush the AI in any manner you wish -- dropping 5 armies (2000 shields!) into an invasion points to a pretty productive empire!

BTW, I wholeheartedly agree that, when not using marines, plopping a good number of infantry (ideally an army if you have the MA) on a mountain is a great invasion tactic and a tough nut to crack for the AI. And I also love the ability to rush an airport and bring some more units to the dance quickly .

Originally posted by Christantine The Great
I'm thinking more in the terms of playing against humans when the expansion comes out. I've never encountered intelligence from the AI so I don't ever expect to see that little manuver made by them.

Sadly, more true than I would like.

Remember, I said the city was heavily fortified. That could mean lots and lots of mech inf and a coastal battery. Maybe even a ship or two.

Yes - if the city is heavily fortified with lots of mech infantry, then for me there are only two choices: (1) bring sufficient naval and air bombard units to bring every defender down to 1 HP; (2) find another target.

Originally posted by nbarclay
Marines in the real world DO NOT engage in amphibious assaults directly against well-defended cities. Rather, they go after a relatively undefended stretch of beach to establish a beachhead to bring in heavier forces.. [ . . . .] I don't like invading foreign continents unless I have an overwhelming advantage, in which case I don't need marines badly enough to "waste" time I could be investing in other technologies.

nbarclay - I won't try to defend or support any of the gameplay features by comparison to the real world - just not applicable in my mind.

And I understand about not wanting to invade without superiority. But my point to Blitzer in this post (above) is that with overwhelming advantages, who cares about tactics? I like those Civ 3 games where I'm still challenged by the modern age, fretting about the UN, worried about the SS, and wondering if I can somehow cripple the dominant civ while paying an "acceptable" price and/or if can I tackle that one other superpower and get to a domination before the chance of an AI SS is realized. If I'm always in a dominant position by the late industrial . . . well . . . the game gets boring. (So I'm realy hoping Theseus' thesis on producing killer AIs through map settings bears fruit ).

BTW, looked at your downloads from the mini-tourney game . . . fantastic! As thorough a whipping as I've seen in a while.

Catt

Edit: corrected # of shields reference

[Unregistered]

Marines can be pretty handy to have around. The number one rule w/ Marines is to soften up the objective. Bomb the living daylights out of the target. Just like irl. No Marine hits a hot beach without hours of heavy artillery bombardment irl, why should your Civ III Marines be any different? Battleships are good, bombers are better. I've taken large cities defended by mech infantry w/ Marines, all you need is a little bit of prep. Sometimes two or three turns worth. If you've properly lambasted the city, then one transport of Marines will open it up for you. And then you park your three transports worth of modern armor in your new city and proceed to finish off the enemy.

Got to do it again last night. Population of 18, defended by four infantry, two vets, one regular & one conscript. Also one artillery piece. Bombarded the vets down to two hit pts, the other two down to one. Knocked the city population down to 14. Sailed 8 vet Marines over to the city. Killed the first defending vet, lost two hit pts. Lost the next Marine to the next vet, but knocked another point off. Killed the conscript, lost three hit pts. Killed the regular, lost two hit pts. Finally killed the remaining vet, lost one hit pt. So I lost one Marine, four were damaged, three unhurt. Parked them all in the city & fortified them. The next two transports unloaded 10 modern armor, four mech inf and two artillery. The MA & a couple of the mech inf proceed to take and raze two more cities. I should note that this is the back door... I'm knocking on the front door with another 30 modern armor and around 40 mech infantry. I end up taking three cities through the back door and four cities through the front in the first turn of the war. In the second turn I take another nine cities. Now there are only two cities remaining. Thank you, USMC!

I should also note that my 'allies' had been fighting this guy for over thirty turns, and all they had done was raze one city. And trade a couple of others back and forth. But then, they're still playing around w/ tanks & infantry...

Bottom line is that Marines are a bloody good tool if properly used, just like paras. Like all tools, you just have to understand their purpose and limitations.

Gung ho!

[DeepO]

Re: City Defense Bonuses Apply

Originally posted by Catt
Someone who actually took statistics and remembers the experience can comment on whether 2500 trials is sufficient to give comfort -- it certainly is for me.

Well, I'm not a statistician, although I use it everyday. And from what I remember 2500 samples should be enough for at least 3 correct digits. Which would mean you have a 99% assurance (or something like that , can't remember real values) that your calculated 25.35% is within 0.1% from the real chance... which should make sense.
I have to say, you have a lot of patience, I'd stop after 200 HP

Just one thing: calculating chances, and trying to observe them is not a true statistical approach, you might miss some factor (assume units always won the first HP when defending in a city, it would screw up your calculations). Better would be if you, instead of doing 2500 HPs worth of tests with marines from a transport, you did 1000 from transport, and 1000 from land. Then you could have a direct comparison whether it differs in chance or not. And if it would, you could calculate what the difference is.

But don't run to start those tests again, they're quite convincing

DeepO

PS: I assume it wasn't possible to make both Marines and Infantry 1000HP units? You'd only had to reload twice

[Gen.Dragolen]

Catt,

I like your ideas on using Marines. I have used them in a very limited role and even then they were always supported by lots of artillery, Modern Armour and a couple of aircraft carriers worth of bombers.

From what I've seen in the editor, shores have a 50% defensive bonus that really makes the Marines weak cannon fodder in the 1.21 game. I've been tinkering with the units and terrain to make it more like the wargames I used to play like Panzer, and Third Reich.

The idea that struck me was that the unit strengths didn't follow a logical progression: a swordsman could take out a Marine or even an infantry unit in open ground. Haven't seen it happen but 3 in 11 is still a 27% chance. Toss in the differences in weapons used and you need to increase the modern units alot.

Test out Marines and Paratroopers with a 16/16/1 versus Infantry 16/20/1 and see how it goes. Not much of a relative change, but add in some attacking Cavalry or Rifleman at 8/8/2 and 8/8/1. I've been using these numbers in some scenarios and it makes keeping up with technology even more important. And if reflects the changes in technology better: Riflemen had a muzzle loader that fired 3 aimed shots a minute out to about 400 yards. Infantry have machine guns that fire 600 rpm out to 1000+ yards. A Lee Enfield could do 10 aimed shots a minute in the hands of a BEF trooper.

Marines are not that differently equipped from a regular infantryman in the US. Common assault rifles, grenades, machine guns, mortars, etc... But the Marines go into harms way in more inventive methods and in a lot more interesting places. (Well Afghanistan was more interesting before most of it got blown up...)

I'll have to finish testing out this scenario and post it for you to try. Better balance amongst the units has made the last 3 test games more interesting: ever seen an AI use loads of Privateers to harrass and enemy before invading ?

[Gen.Dragolen]

Sample Mod

Catt,

Try this out and let me know what you think of the modern combat. I haven't gotten far enough to see just how big a change it makes to the CC's game play for the Marines and other specialty units.

D.

[Theseus]

General:

* Shores have a 50% bonus? Where is this in the editor?

* BEF = British Expeditionary Force?

* Although I like your mods, I'm still playing "stock." Can't be done with the editor, but I'd love to see Marines bonused for their primary mission... taking ground. It's a misconception that it's about beaches... First to Fight, period.