Artillery and Cannon: They need other units to work?

[Jason Beaudoin]

I was reading somewhere that these units can be captured and that they require another unit in order to operate them.

How does that work? Anyone know? Do the two units meld together, or does another unit have to be on the same square in order for them to work?

Anyone... anyone...?

[Yoleus]

Idea:
you know about the bomber stuff, no attack just "mission" or "operation" capabilities? I think all the bombing/bombarding stuff will be treated this way.
So no attack in the classic sense, but bombarding (softening) capabilities - used by an other unit or army.

[Jason Beaudoin]

Yes... I know that they will have a bombard value, but I heard that they need another unit to operate. Meaning, on their own, they can't function. I wish I knew where I saw that.

[cort]

that is not correct.. a cannon is a self-capable unit, in the same way as it was before..
nothing required to operate..

they might be captured though.. im not sure but most probably any unit with a defence value 0 --workers, catapults, etc.-- might be captured..

[korn469]

Jason

i too have heard what you are talking about, and i don't have time to track down the exact quote right now but i agree with Yoleus

i think the quote was a miss interpretation of how artillary works...firaxis was trying to explain about bombard attacks in my opinion, since a bombard doesn't kill an enemy and that regular units are still needed

however if it is true that you must man a catapult then i think that will add extra micromanagement to the game without a single beneficial outcome, not only that it would violate the civ philosophy of abstraction and simplification

lets just hope that this is another misinterpretation, like the nationalism is a government misinterpretation

[Ralf]

Originally posted by cort
that is not correct.. a cannon is a self-capable unit, in the same way as it was before..

they might be captured though.

Well, maybe your right.

But who would dare to besiege a city, or just move around catapults/cannons/howitzers alone within enemy-territory, if they are easily stealable, even by a 1-1-1 enemy warrior-unit? Using them in armies only seems to be the safest and most practical route.

Originally posted by Korn469
however if it is true that you must man a catapult then i think that will add extra micromanagement to the game without a single beneficial outcome, not only that it would violate the civ philosophy of abstraction and simplification

Why? Infact, its seems easier to me to have them in armies - you move around 1 single army-stack, instead of 3-4 units independently. Also, I dont think one is forced to have them in armies only - they ARE self-operating, I believe. But because of their zero point defence-stat, it seems more clever to incorporate them in armies only.

[Faboba]

Hmmmmm stacks.......

see http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...threadid=29223

[Crouchback]

Originally posted by Ralf
... because of their zero point defence-stat, it seems more clever to incorporate them in armies only.

Yes, if they keep their full bombard capacity with an army that includes a non-bombard unit. But Firaxis says, somewhere, that armies a re offensive items for taking heavily defended cities. So I'm hoping that putting a defensive unit on the same tile as my artillery will be enough to protect them.

David

[Ralf]

Originally posted by Crouchback
So I'm hoping that putting a defensive unit on the same tile as my artillery will be enough to protect them.

Thats an alternative also. I hope thats possible - why shouldnt it be?

[Jason Beaudoin]

I believe that since artillery and cannon are defenceless, it would make sense that Firaxis would have simply required a unit to accompany the artillery or cannon.

Like mentioned in this tread above, it would be pretty senseless to send a connon unit out on it's own without something to protect it.

I'm just wondering whether you can group these two units together to reduce micromanagement, which is another concern mentioned here.

[Cluk]

It really seems bizzare that building a catapult or cannon wouldn't imply training a crew. I suppose by killing the crew, a siege weapon could be captured, but wouldn't the crew fight back, possibly ending in the weapon's destruction? A bunch of warriors couldn't just charge at and sieze a cannon aimed at them.

[cyril25376]

Originally posted by Jason Beaudoin
Like mentioned in this tread above, it would be pretty senseless to send a connon unit out on it's own without something to protect it.

And your enemy is very happy about your "gift"

[Inverse Icarus]

too lazy to read all the threads so heres what i know.

in that shot with the build queue the catapults attack rating is 0(4) meaning it can be captured if it is alone, and can attack (bombard) if it is with another unit.

will stacks work, or do they have to be in an army?

[Executor]

Originally posted by Jingo
will stacks work, or do they have to be in an army?

Considering the rarity of armies, I would have to assume a stack would work, else artillery would be nigh useless.

Btw, did you change your username a few days ago? I always preferred UberKruX.

[Jason Beaudoin]

Originally posted by Jingo:
in that shot with the build queue the catapults attack rating is 0(4) meaning it can be captured if it is alone, and can attack (bombard) if it is with another unit.

So according to you, they need to be accompanied by another unit in order to be used. How do you come to that conclusion in a screen shot?