Do you find armies to be useless?

[N. Machiavelli]

Originally posted by Dissident

Because I never found a need for armies, I never built them. So therefore they must be useless

And Atomic Bombs are useless to a Chimpanzee. Does that mean A-Bombs are useless?

[Da_cOmRaDe_MiKe]

i luv landing about 5 or 6 armies of panzer tanks into an enemys base and destroying thegit that way... noting beats rolling them over so easily...

[Spec]

Originally posted by N. Machiavelli


And Atomic Bombs are useless to a Chimpanzee. Does that mean A-Bombs are useless?

Come on now....It's a simple poll, either you use them or you dont, I just wanna know why you do or dont, I dont wanna know who's right.

Spec.

[Cookie Monster]

Armies.....love 'em.


In my experiences they only work well when composed of either tanks or modern armor (for attack) or infantry or mech infantry (for defense).

One army of 3 tanks can knock out a mech infantry defender. An army can absorb a lot of damage before being destroyed. They do have their limits, but as Ming pointed out they have their uses if used properly.

Rock on !

[Worthingtons]

Yep, Armies are definatly something that 'have to be made use of properly'

Think about, would you feel safe feeling sending 28 tanks in a stack towards your rival with nearly 100 cities and a (at least) 500 strong unit military. I woudnt, my units would be picked off before they could complete thier mission. But do i feel safe sending Seven Stacked Armies?? Absolutly, I'll be laughing in a couple of turns when Japan's entire trade system is crippled.

[kailhun]

Re: Do you find armies to be useless?

Originally posted by Spectator
I think armies are useless. I only use the first leader to build an army to get my first victory with it so that I can build the heroic epic. That's it. I never make armies cuz they suck at attacking and defending. I'd ratter have 4 seperate tanks than 4 in one armie. And I'm sure that 4 seperate tanks can easily kill an army of 4 tanks. So what do y'all think?

Spec.

Editor: switch of 'victorious army needed'. Gotta love that editor. Now if I could figure out how to trigger leaders without combat the leader thing would be done.

Robert

[Oho]

Ave !!!

In the late game an Army of modern armors is the only almost certain way to take out an mechanized infantry defending a large city. I remember wasting 10 veteran modern armors taking out one initially regular but subsequently elite mechanized infantry, and that just eats the bisquit.

A late game war is tedious anyway but I am determined to win one, my current, Deity game by conquest.

- Oho -

[Martinus Magnificus]

Originally posted by Spatzimaus
So, in my game I made it so that Armies can Unload (to upgrade) and removed the "victorious" requirement from the Academy. Try a few of these changes and you'll start using them more, and more importantly the computer will start using them against you.

You can actually make an army unload?? I thought I've read in other threads that the 'unload' function did not work for armies.

[Alex]

Originally posted by Martinus Magnificus


You can actually make an army unload?? I thought I've read in other threads that the 'unload' function did not work for armies.

AFAIK, there is a bug in v1.17f patch that allows this. If you stack, say, an army of 3 tanks with two other tanks (out of the army, of course) and order these two tanks to move using the stack command ("j" key), then ALL tanks will move to the specified location, therefore unloading the army (which will stay in its original square). Then you can load new units onto it. But this method is surely unstable, and can make your game crash (it crashed on me).

I don't know if this was fixed; I heard something about a newer version of v1.17f, that supposedly fixes the "army found in a hut" thing. Don't know if this version removed the unloading bug, though.

You cannot use the editor to make an army unload, can you?

[Blaupanzer]

If you have the leader to spare, an army of defenders would be the perfect accompaniant to the artillery/workers that facilitate an assault. However, that's a big "if." Despite 5 - 6,000 years of war, I seldom see more than 2 - 4 leaders. These get consumed by wonder construction or the FP. So, I voted "useless," mostly because they are never a high enough priority to me. I like Ming's suggestion though, as invasion of an AI-controlled continent is a very tough nut to crack.

[nato]

My favorite serious use for an Army is to guard my bombard stack. No way I want to lose my 40 Artillery!

I am hoping the blitz and ZOC will make them more useful. Back when they did not have this ability, I used to like to make an "honor guard". This would be an Army of my unique unit that would guard my capital. Doesn't affect the game, but qualifies for "Just fun to have but not to use".

[Spec]

Re: Re: Do you find armies to be useless?

Originally posted by kailhun


Editor: switch of 'victorious army needed'. Gotta love that editor. Now if I could figure out how to trigger leaders without combat the leader thing would be done.

Robert

Thanks man but...I dont need armies, I need leaders. So I'll do that with the Heroic epic...if it works.

[Pius Popprasch]

Armies are one toy more to tinker with, imho. I don't even build the first one(for Heroic Epic) because there's always something more important to build. And I had games where I didn't get leaders after The Heroic Epic anymore.