Ranged weapons

[Aggie]

Up to now we have not seriously considered ranged weapons. Soon we will be entering the invasion of the persian homeland. I want to know what the feeling regarding catapults are, my experience is that 5 catapults can just about pulverize a cities defense and thus help in an attack. I was particularly wondeing about making them for phase 2(the attack on antioch and the persian heartland). There will we encounter larger well defended cities who can get reinforcements and offensive units. It would be best if we could damage these units and defenses before we stormed the city.
Aggie

[OPD]

Catapults are great IMHO. As much as really hate them when 5 in a row fail the fact that they never die and can be upgraded makes them great.
Previously I didn't think we could really afford to build any but if the SMC wants to build catapults (probably at the expense of other millitary units) then great. The sooner we have a stack of catapults that will last right through to the end of the game the better.

[Aggie]

Opd i pretty much agree with you. Right now I making very general plans for the assault on e persia, When I have all the responses ( and after we have tyre), I will make more precise plans and numbers. Right now i'm imagining 2 10men army(exact components to be decided later). One will head toward antioch and pasagarde and arbela and the other force will go se toward the capital and point e and se of there. The catapults will go with this force since that is where the heaviest resistance will be I suspect. (The catapult are in addition to the army).
Aggie

[GhengisFarb™]

Catapults sound like they could prove very useful in the protracted war, say we build catapults(haul to the front in galleys) and horsemen(run to the front over roads). We could use a pikeman or two to protect our catapult stacks and attack the weakened defenders with horsemen.

Later the horsemen will upgrade to Knights then Cavalry, and the catapults to cannon then artillery so any units we build will have a long life of usefulness.

[Aggie]

Good idea ghengis though with roads we could do almost as well using land movment. The e persian nation due to being grassland is indeed prime real estate for horsemen. We could do a blitzkreig and let the heavier units attack the north. Remember the quicker we win the less chance of culture flip. After the war we can station the remains of the army in persepolis to deter such a flip.
Aggie

[Aro]

Good plan, Ghengis. Catapults can upgrade...

[adaMada]

I think the idea of two types of offensive stacks would help us... the first containing longbowmen/pikemen/catapults (all mvmt-1 units that can upgrade basically) as well as any leftover swordsmen we've got, while the second type of offensive stack would contain horsemen/faster units.

We could blow through their defenses with our fast stacks (which could go out into their terratory, attack, and then retreat and repair while a second stack goes in, creating a rotation so that they're always under attack) and then slowly take cities with our slow stacks.

Just a thought... if we did one slow stack per city (probably wouldn't have a catapult in that case), and three fast stacks that rotated so that they were always either attacking, repairing, or in transit, we could take over the Persians bit by bit while loosing very few units.

Of course, Military Strategy isn't my strong point, so any thoughts?

-- adaMada

[nz_upy]

Where do the swordmen fit into the first attack strategy?
Use of the galleys would divert them from colonisation of Uber Isle which is a high priority.

Which begs to ask the question, What is more important, the conquest of Persia (Pyramids) or Uber Isle?

[MrWhereItsAt]

Well hi there, brethren Kiwi!

Fortunately, there are no other civs that even know the location of Uber Island thanks to painstaking measures initiated by the Foreign Affairs Ministry. We have a plan in motion for colonising this island and exploring it's unknown wonders, and the Galleys are IIRC not needed by the Supreme Apolytonian Army. If they are, we may divert resources in the homelands to construction of a third Galley for the colonisation plan to progress.

As for Persia, they are a dangerous foe - but we have caught them with their pantaloons around their ankles reading smuggled copies of the Gazette (their papers have yet get in motion - it is difficult to print without Iron type!). It is not often we can expect an opportunity like this, and as much as I love the jungles of Apolytonia that I call home, we must to greener pastures - places like the Persian homelands!

[Panag]

hi ,

catapults are great , but should we waste our time now on building them , .........

have a nice day

[BigFurryMonster]

Originally posted by OPD
The sooner we have a stack of catapults that will last right through to the end of the game the better.

There! You said it. I always end up with a very useful stack of catapults / cannons / artillery that last a long time throughout the entire game.

They can't be "killed", either. Combined with the fact that the AI is not very skilled at using captured catapults, it makes them a great asset to your army.

I often use catapults to soften up enemy defenders, before moving in with my elite units, so that they have a good chance of surviving a battle and generating Leaders.

[=OttomusCeasar=]

Originally posted by Aggie
Good idea ghengis though with roads we could do almost as well using land movment. The e persian nation due to being grassland is indeed prime real estate for horsemen. We could do a blitzkreig and let the heavier units attack the north. Remember the quicker we win the less chance of culture flip. After the war we can station the remains of the army in persepolis to deter such a flip.
Aggie

After we win the Persian capitals going to be way up north somewhere, I don't see why our Elite army can't march north and take possession of the American rebellion.

[DeathByTheSword]

very simple we need to use catapults and even more so in the future. (I had a strang vision about some thing the people from my vision called cannons).
I support the general attack plan from Aggie but i would like to say that maybe one big force will work better . as far as we know all persian cities are connected. so as soon as we captured one of there cities!? we can move atleast two tiles over roads and then we are in persian terrritory again. the units that were injured are healed in the captured city because of the Sun Tzu barrack (we are building that with the GL right?) and they can support the one big army very fast this way every two or three turns (with luck and a mobile force even maybe sooner) we capture a city and the most frontier city is occupied by a strong force. so counter attack can be dealt with easily. if we split up our forces we may take one or two cities and then find out that we havent got the surplus in power to attack and the advance holds. if we use one big force the losses will probably be less so we can advance a lot longer, only not with capturing 2 cities in the initial assault.

ok this seems a little like rammbling but that is because I just poured my ideas out

[Aggie]

DBTS, I will consider specific plans for the final push once we get gordium, it could be that we have one giant push instead of 2 thrust. By the way i'm amazed that you give good input into two games. I keep meaning to get more into the SMAC demo game, but due to figuring out order etc, am unable to participate more than just looking.
Aggie

[GhengisFarb™]

The sad thing is I never build any ranged engines, I capture a few now and then but that's it.

In Warhammer I use massive amounts of artillery but not in Civ3, don't know why.

The strange thing is that actually use to be my job. So you'd think I'd use them all the time.