M.A.S.H. Units in Civ3/PtW

[ducki]

No, it's not what you think.

Dig this guy's strat with a settler.

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?postid=1485040#post1485040

Brilliant.
Even moreso if you have Sun Tzu's.

It's a disposable defense bonus and "field hospital".


I wish I'd thought of that.

[statusperfect]

Interesting.

How about combining that with railroads and a unit with "blitz" ability?

[ducki]

I think the main thing to think of is, it's an instant M.A.S.H. Unit and an instant "fortress" with a Zero Turn Build Time.

Way better than a normal fortress if you don't mind the 2-pop loss due to the quickness as opposed to building a Fortress.

Plus you can disrupt his trade network and his resource network in optimal circumstances.
Just beautiful.

[Zero]

It's what I always did anyway.

Seriously, I did. It also pushes culture border back so you can utilize some enemy roads and experience less sluggish movement due to enemy border. It's even sicker now that you can turn off cultural conversion. Back in Civ III, I had to execute this plan fast in risk of getting the city converted.

This can also be twisted to teach a borg city builders a lesson. When cities are too close, there simply isn't enough culture border to slow enemy onslaught... Sorta like City hopping if you ask what I call it.

[ChrisiusMaximus]

Yes I too have done this on the AI many times and it really does work well, but like Calc says there is a risk of flip. I have'nt got PTW yet.

[ducki]

I like Cultural Conversions, but even so, I can't wait to try this out.

It doesn't matter if the town flips in 20 turns or so - by then, I'll be done.

I won't drop the city until I start the attack, and it's purely temporary - a place to heal and pool reinforcements.

Odds are, this sort of city will be very poorly placed for actual long term production, so even if I gain the territory, it's getting disbanded once I have a better site or decide to keep conquered cities.