Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
July 14, 2014 at 3:11 pm (This post was last modified: July 14, 2014 at 4:27 pm by Chad32.)
When making improvements, I try to add gold via trade stations in flat terrain that isn't next to a river. Otherwise I'll put farms next to river hexes that are already giving me one gold, and mines on hills. Of course desert tiles that aren't next to a river, or bare tundra tiles, always get trade stations.
I haven't tried having two sets of troops, since that just means more maintenance, but I like that cavalry units can move after attacking. Stand them in a city or fort. attack the enemy, then retreat back into the fort.
Poe's Law: "Without a winking smiley or other blatant display of humor, it is impossible to create a parody of Fundamentalism that SOMEONE won't mistake for the real thing."
(July 14, 2014 at 3:09 pm)Insanity Wrote: I don't often use cavalry but I think they are extremely weak to cities. At least thats my understanding of it. I think ships struggle too. Foot soldiers tend to not loose health too bad when hit by cities.
I used a unit earlier on to finish the job against a city state, it was good because I could keep it well out of range, and with the extra moves it had it could jump straight in for the kill without taking any hits.
That said, I wouldn't be using it for anything other than the final attack on a city. Maybe they're more useful for going around and harassing other enemy units while in enemy territory? Other than that, yeah, not the most useful units.
(July 14, 2014 at 3:12 pm)Napoléon Wrote: That said, I wouldn't be using it for anything other than the final attack on a city. Maybe they're more useful for going around and harassing other enemy units while in enemy territory? Other than that, yeah, not the most useful units.
Yeah, great for thinning out forces and dealing with barbarians. Its nice too because once they are damaged they can retreat quickly to a city and heal up.
At the time I started I was just beginning the medieval era. I had 2 catapults, an archer unit, 2 horsemen units (1 archer and 1 melee) and a swordsman unit. Plus about 3 triremes around the city. I would have probably took the city but (with the stupid way right click and left click works in this game) I ended up sending 2 of my units into the sea inadvertently. That's when an enemy trireme came out of nowhere and destroyed one of my catapults and archer units. I still should have had enough to beat the city but it brought in some spearmen reinforcements which further dwindled my military presence and in the end, it just turned into a stalemate. I had every city producing gold just so I could rush units back into the battle but they just couldn't reach the city quickly enough to put the pressure on. My catapult was doing fine and I had the city at low health, but I didn't have the melee units to finish the job. Like I said, ended up that whenever a melee unit got near they'd be destroyed by the enemy's trireme. Leading me to rush another unit, send it in, have it destroyed and then I'd repeat. I just thought it's better to give in and regroup rather than carry on this cycle of stalemate.
[...]
Yeah I definitely learnt a bit about what units work and what units don't, and how to use them. I only went for the siege because I was an ally with the Siamese and they asked me to go to war with the Persians. I'd been eyeing up their capital for a while because it's right on my boarder, so I thought I'd give it a shot. I have a much bigger military now though, I will probably wait for the right moment and I don't think it will give me as much trouble as before. I didn't anticipate the enemy navy punishing me as badly as it did. I won't be making that mistake again.
Yeah, you had the right idea, but I can make a couple of suggestions.
1) Try to bring a big enough force to do the job so that you won't need to produce/buy
2) Redundancy. Bring at least two siege units (which you did), and at least two foot soldier units (spear, pike, sword, musket, etc) above what you need in 3).
3) Everything else you bring along has two jobs a) keep the units in 1) and 2) alive and as undamaged as possible, and b) kill ungarrisoned units / protect your flanks.
As you know, ranged units can't take cities. Mounted units are nearly useless for doing so - though I have occasionally used chariots / knights / cavalry for storming a city once it has been reduced to 0 defense. Infantry units are far better - though it's still a good idea to fully reduce a city with siege first.
Bringing along some naval units was a good idea, you don't want to get flanked by surprise from the sea. Later in the game, you may ditch most of your naval melee units in favor of naval ranged units, which can be invaluable in laying siege to coastal cities (hit 'em with 3-5 battleships, and then swoop in with a destroyer to take the city. No ground units needed.)
Mis-clicking sucks. Still happens to me occasionally.
(July 14, 2014 at 3:09 pm)Insanity Wrote: I don't often use cavalry but I think they are extremely weak to cities. At least thats my understanding of it. I think ships struggle too. Foot soldiers tend to not loose health too bad when hit by cities.
Yes, mounted units for the most part are weak attacking cities. IIRC, knights are gimped 50%.
*Some* naval units are. Privateers and destroyers both have perks just for attacking cities, and as long as you pummel them into submission first, have little difficulty taking cities. Buffed privateers/destroyers are *awesome* for taking cities - but keep them out of range until you're ready to issue the coup de grace.
(July 14, 2014 at 3:27 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote: Mis-clicking sucks. Still happens to me occasionally.
The weird random camera movement doesn't help. Your mid siege and suddenly its forcing you to watch a city state fighting a barbarian.
Its a shame the game takes as long as it does. Otherwise it would be a good one for some of us to play together.
I turn off all the turn and combat animations.
I've haven't really played any multiplayer since Civ3? Yeah, it takes a hellishly long time to play a game. I know someone that does, and even with pretty short turn durations, the game is usually won by the person who drops out last.
It would be interesting - playing against the AI is pretty predictable. I'd have to change a lot of things about how I play against real, thinking opponents.
(July 14, 2014 at 3:35 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote: *Some* naval units are. Privateers and destroyers both have perks just for attacking cities, and as long as you pummel them into submission first, have little difficulty taking cities. Buffed privateers/destroyers are *awesome* for taking cities - but keep them out of range until you're ready to issue the coup de grace.
I usually just have them around to help with any incoming ships/in range troops. I don't like risking them being damaged by cities. They seem to take forever to repair.
I don't think I've had the chance to use privateers against cities yet. I had two in my last game but they were badly damaged fighting some insane build up of barbarians. I'll give them a go next time.
(July 14, 2014 at 3:29 pm)Insanity Wrote: The weird random camera movement doesn't help. Your mid siege and suddenly its forcing you to watch a city state fighting a barbarian.
Its a shame the game takes as long as it does. Otherwise it would be a good one for some of us to play together.
I turn off all the turn and combat animations.
I've haven't really played any multiplayer since Civ3? Yeah, it takes a hellishly long time to play a game. I know someone that does, and even with pretty short turn durations, the game is usually won by the person who drops out last.
It would be interesting - playing against the AI is pretty predictable. I'd have to change a lot of things about how I play against real, thinking opponents.
There is no PBEM in Civ 5 unfortunately and I can't be arsed to sit through a whole MP match, but I'm playing a couple of matches with Giant Multiplayer Robot
(July 14, 2014 at 3:39 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote: I turn off all the turn and combat animations.
I like watching the little battles.
(July 14, 2014 at 3:39 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote: I've haven't really played any multiplayer since Civ3? Yeah, it takes a hellishly long time to play a game. I know someone that does, and even with pretty short turn durations, the game is usually won by the person who drops out last.
It would be interesting - playing against the AI is pretty predictable. I'd have to change a lot of things about how I play against real, thinking opponents.
I haven't played any multiplayer at all yet. Its one of those you can only play if everyone has planned to take an entire day out to play. I think I'd get butchered against players, AI rarely screws with me but I think humans might attack earlier than I could handle.
