Blitzkrieg - armoured columns and mobile and positional warfare

[Commander]

Any ideas on Blitzkrieg and mobile warfare?

Commander Blitz

[Blaupanzer]

Howies! One of the designers is a real fan of the Russian strategies regarding artillery. Use Mech inf to secure critical ground, pre-worked engineers to complete rails/forts, armor to clear opposing units in the open, and howies to crack cities. I prefer to bribe cites when possible, but this strategy does work. It's a must against late-game capitols and democracies.

Another thread addresses using alpine troops and spies/diplos in swarms. I tried that and it works too. It's cheaper than the above. You might call it the Chinese strategy.

The U.S. strategy of relying on airpower and navies does not work as well in Civ, unless you get bombers before the AI gets flight.

[DaveV]

The problem with howies is that they render superfluous all the other combined arms stuff. Just move several dozen howies along the railroads, and wipe out your opponent in a single turn. Yawn.

[N35t0r]

quote: Originally posted by DaveV on 11-09-2000 09:52 AM The problem with howies is that they render superfluous all the other combined arms stuff. Just move several dozen howies along the railroads, and wipe out your opponent in a single turn. Yawn.

The best defense is to attack.

[kcbob]

But if you're going to use howitzers (and I love 'em), do we all use the same strategies? i.e.,

1. Use a spy to first examine the opponent's city. (Sun Tzu probably said something about this.)

2. Never (whenever avoidable) fire a howitzer more than once while attacking a city. Leave yourself the movement factor to move into the city after it's been taken.

3. Use all the adjoinging squares when attacking, thus cutting down on available squares for the dreaded AI partisans.

As for Mobile Warfare, I rush to that when it becomes available. After discovering it, I instantly set to building barracks before I produce the tanks. And once I have those, there is not a lot more formidable than a vet tank on a mountain in a fortress.
------------------
Frodo lives!
[This message has been edited by kcbob (edited November 09, 2000).]

[ColdWizard]

vet tank on a mountain? just nuke it

[kcbob]

quote: Originally posted by ColdWizard on 11-09-2000 01:59 PM vet tank on a mountain? just nuke it

Yes, but...

I try to avoid nuclear wars at all cost. However, if you did use this strategy, it would seem to be a bit expensive. Then again, it would be effective. I'll give you that!

------------------
Frodo lives!

[ColdWizard]

expensive, but maybe worth it if the mountain was a major defensive stronghold that needed clearing to make way for an army advance.

as for avoiding nuclear war, ai isn't smart enough to park a tank on a mountain. if its an mp game... well whatever it takes to win

[Bohlen]

quote: Originally posted by kcbob on 11-09-2000 01:22 PM 2. Never (whenever avoidable) fire a howitzer more than once while attacking a city. Leave yourself the movement factor to move into the city after it's been taken.

This is the key to REALLY using howies effectively. If you must or want to attack twice with them, have two trailing engineers and a couple of defensive units to build and fortify a fort outside the newly captured city that same attacking turn. This way you can stack the howies and get the most bang for your buck on one turn. Of course this stacking/fort technique does not control partisans after the city is taken. However, throw some alpine troops in your new city and they'll be ok when city fortified against the partisans.

[Mercantile]

Like most strategies, the bomber before ai gets flight, is a window of opportunity i find these strategies make the game more appealing. Although they allow you to punish opponents, the window of opportunity for all war like strategies in mp is very short. It is often difficult to have an advantage that is so deceisive against your neighbor, but not always which is what makes war in civ costly and almost a last resort.

[SandMonkey]

Not exactly the most efficient warfare machine, but...

I like to mix planes (bombers AND fighters) into my blitz strats. I'll send the planes through to clear out any stray untis that could pose a problem to a land invasion. The fighters can take care of any stray bombers.

[off-topic]
Mercantile, I just learned, in my AP European History course, about mercantilism. Do you use this form of economics in your civ playing?

Although I know I'm not 100% dead on, for all those who are clueless about mercantilism... This was at the time when precious metals were being mined from North/South America and being shipped back to Europe, and countries would buy armies/palaces and whatnot with the gold bullion they were receiving. Louis XIV and his economist (of the time period) Colbert adopted the policy that a country should hoard all the bullion that it possibly can. You should only export goods, and never import goods. In this way you would eventually gather all the bullion from the other countries. If you absolutely had to import a good, than it would be ideal to buy it in raw material form, and then make the finished good on your own and sell it at a profit. But in the meantime, you have to become a self-sufficient country, i.e., you have to make EVERYTHING that your people will demand. In the short run this worked well, as France became the leading industrial nation of the time and became relatively self sufficient. Unfortunately for the Sun King, a few bad harvests and a seemingly endless parade of wars led to virtual bankruptcy and massive starvation among the peasantry.

Granted in real life this policy failed, but could it be applied to civ?
[/off-topic]

I probably should have just started a new topic....

------------------
SandMonkey

"Shut up brain or I'll stab you with a qtip"
-Homer Simpson

"Ecky ecky ecky!"
"It's just a flesh wound!"
- Monty Python and the Holy Grail

Check out my 1602 A.D. site

[Mercantile]

in SP yes in MP no... i suck at MP so i am often just scrambling for territory and lagging waaaaay behind in tech. MP and x2prod are a waaaaaaay different game, quite boggling to say the least.

------------------
Do you shovel snow in your birkenstocks?

[East Street Trader]

Howies are too strong.

How do players defend against them in MP (assuming any MP game gets that far)?

[East Street Trader]

I, too, rarely attack twice with my Nemesis units - until a city is taken that is. I use the rails to attack once and then withdraw so as to wear down any well defended city. Once a city is ripe to fall, I take it, letting the partisans have squares either next to the city itself or next to forts that I have occupied with mech infantry. Then the howies move into the city or the forts ready to use their remaining attack to kill off the pesky partisans as soon as they appear.

I like to keep the howies at full strength (to preserve two full movement points at all times) so rest any that get bruised along the way.

It can pay to attack the partisans immediately because if you interpose a move with another piece the A1 may sue for peace and, if you are a democracy, the doves may win the vote - thus letting the partisans live for the time it takes to provoke another fracas. But they won't be pillaging so, even then, no great harm is done.
[This message has been edited by East Street Trader (edited November 10, 2000).]

[East Street Trader]

Nice description of mercantilism, SandMonkey.

What happened in Spain, by way of contrast, is that they simply used the huge amounts of gold that came in from the New World to fund a higher standard of living and dynastic empire building. It is argued that the long term social effect was to create over-weening pride and to stiffle entrepreneurial spirit. So, when the gold ran out, the country went into a loooong decline (from which it has perhaps never really recovered).

I suspect that being fought over (and mercilessly pillaged) for years in the Napoleonic wars probably didn't help but the arguements are still persuasive.

But perhaps a Spanish Apolytoner could tell us how the effect of New World gold on their history is now viewed there?

I often do follow a policy in the game that is close to mercantilism. When doing so I confine trade to local routes between my own cities, demand tribute and stock up gold both to make AI bribery more difficult and to fund bribery of my own. I find that three or four trade route arrows per city is all that is needed to sustain an expanding and productive monarchy. And following that approach I am willing to trade with barb cities - which accept your goods but don't send any back - a pure application of the mercantilist idea!

[Mercantile]

Trade at home, easily the best way to go unless you have a small powerful rival close by. Civ encourages Mercanilianism (probably not a word) as supply and demand change when you are travelling all over the world with your goods. Besides my people tend to be somewhat egocentric, so we look at competition and neighbors as slightly inferior (even though we are usually the ones behind in tech in MP)

------------------
Do you shovel snow in your birkenstocks?

[Gatekeeper]

Everyone:

I do not think howitzers are too strong. Heck, they're the only combat ground unit really capable of cracking an AI city that's sitting on a river with a wall surrounding it.

Air power? It's still a bugger when the AI city is defended by veteran fighters *plus* veteran APCs backed up by SAM missile batteries.

Coastal attacks? Two words: coastal fortresses. Combined with veteran defenders, they can sink a battleship w/o losing anything themselves. Plus the AI tosses cruise missiles like there's no tomorrow ... so one can be fortunate to even get a battleship w/i range of an AI city.

Returning to the matter of ground units, I've had to make artillery capable of ignoring city walls in order for the AI to really conduct a massive conquering campaign either against itself or the human player. Otherwise gunpowder units in a walled city on a river can pretty much stop anything, even armor (unless one is willing to sacrifice four to eight divisions).

If anything, railroads should enable one to move only six to eight times. That would put something of a damper on all-out railroad blitzkriegs (that was one of the few things CTP did right).

CYBERAmazon

[SandMonkey]

quote: Originally posted by East Street Trader on 11-10-2000 07:36 AM What happened in Spain, by way of contrast, is that they simply used the huge amounts of gold that came in from the New World to fund a higher standard of living and dynastic empire building. It is argued that the long term social effect was to create over-weening pride and to stiffle entrepreneurial spirit. So, when the gold ran out, the country went into a loooong decline (from which it has perhaps never really recovered). I suspect that being fought over (and mercilessly pillaged) for years in the Napoleonic wars probably didn't help but the arguements are still persuasive.

quote: Many American textbooks point to The Spanish Armada as "the beginning of the end" for Spanish worldwide influence. The first (of many) large military naval losses to Britian which tipped worldwide dominance to England. King Phillip bankrupted the Spanish treasury in attempt to build the Armada and was subsidizing Dutch efforts around the world to act as a counterbalance to France.

I learned just what you guys said: the beginning of the end for the Spanish was when the Dutch revolted in 1556 with the abdication of Charles V. When Phillip II took the throne as Holy Roman Emperor, he appointed a female (can't rememebr her name...), who raised taxes and brought the Inquisition to the Netherlands. This didn't sit too well with the Protestant Dutch, so the revolted, finding great leadership in William the Silent. The Spanish poured incredible amounts of money into the war, thus adding somewhat to the Price Revolution. The English were also supporting the Dutch, so Phillip sent the Spanish Armada, with the backing of the Papacy (who wanted Protestant England to come back to Catholicism), to attack England. Actually, the first task they were supposed to do was to sail to the Spanish Netherlands (Belgium today) and pick up a land army to invade England with. Well we all know what happened... Drake sailed behind the Spanish fleet, broke up the poorly supplied Spanish ships, and the whole Protestant wind thing... but yeah, there's your connection the the Spanish Armada and the "beginning of the end" for the Spanish.

And CYBER, if your comment about air superiority was directed at my comment, note that I said I would attack units that were outside of cities, not in them.

[Shogun Gunner]

quote: Originally posted by East Street Trader on 11-10-2000 07:36 AM What happened in Spain, by way of contrast, is that they simply used the huge amounts of gold that came in from the New World to fund a higher standard of living and dynastic empire building. It is argued that the long term social effect was to create over-weening pride and to stiffle entrepreneurial spirit. So, when the gold ran out, the country went into a loooong decline (from which it has perhaps never really recovered).

Many American textbooks point to The Spanish Armada as "the beginning of the end" for Spanish worldwide influence. The first (of many) large military naval losses to Britian which tipped worldwide dominance to England. King Phillip bankrupted the Spanish treasury in attempt to build the Armada and was subsidizing Dutch efforts around the world to act as a counterbalance to France. In civ terms, the Spanish spent a lot of gold with rush builds for Frigates and Galleons for the Spanish Armada and spent a lot of gold appeasing their Dutch ally with gold.

[Gatekeeper]

SandMonkey:

Hmm ... nope. My air power commentary was basically directed at no one. Just my personal observation from past experience .

CYBERAmazon