Smart use of Marines

I've seen many people complain that Marines are useless. One thing, they are not useless. Even though Howitzers do make amphiboius assaults seems pointless marines have a good defensive factor and pretty cheap to build. And consider this, Amphibious warfare comes alot earlier in the tech tree than Robotics so I use marines quite often for amphibious assaulting.

[Ming]

They sure are useful for attacking those one square island cities

[Seeker]

I think Ming's post contains a subtle message about the usefulness of marines...

1)They just aren't strong enough. vet alpine troop has strength 5 x 350% when behind city walls, that's 17.5. vet Marine is 8 x 50%= 12.

2) I can build a cavalry instead

The times i've tried it by getting it early, you need to have massive amounts of marines, like full transports, so democ is usually out.

I will sometimes build marines to defend cities with ridiculously high production before mech inf.

One way: i sometimes play a modpack where all units have attack +1, makes offense a little easier.

[Smash]

ya it all depends on what they will be attacking.They do have a decent attack number but if they are facing somewhat "modern" defenders their usefulness would be limited.They don't have to "land" first so they attack at full strength without "prep" work.If you could get them fast enough they would be great.

[Xin Yu]

This is an interesting topic. Some aspects should be tested.

a)When marines attack from the ocean, will city walls be effective?

b)When marines attack from the ocean, will coastal fortress be effective?

c)When marines attack from the ocean and win, will the city population decrease?

Suppose the answers are all 'NO', then sometimes marines are better than other land units in attacking (because of no population decreasing); however, if you really can attack from the ocean, why not choose bomber, heli, or battleship?

[Seeker]

I think they're affected by city walls.

I don't know about amphibious units not reducing population.

If u have helicopters, I use paratroopers and bombers.

I don't think marines are effected by walls.
And besides fighter have a 4/2 attack/defense so they suck, bomber cost too much to build. And also carriers costs less than transports.

[johnmcd]

I once attacked Washington with 3 (three, count 'em) transports full of marines. I lost the lot on about three vet alpine troops. I was beginging to wonder if they were affected by both coastal fortress AND city walls. Nowadays I'll just pound a city to death with a battleship or whatever and send in a couple of marines to claim. You can't fight with them though IMHO.

[Bird]

I'm not so sure that city walls affect amphibious assaults by marines. Against the ai, I frequently use marines to take one or two cities on an island. This is particularly effective if you pick your target carefully and hit where defenses are weaker. But even with city walls, vet marines usually get the job done with a higher rate of success than I would expect if city walls worked, although you might want to have two transports rather than one, depending on the situation. Those are just my observations, not the results of any kind of study, though. The window of opportunity for marines might be small, but it's there.

[jpk]

About the only time I build a marine is if I have a city that really needs a unit becaue the AI is headed that way and I'm not sure whether an offensive or a defensive unit would be better for the situation. Marines are good at both.

Other than that, the only time I select a marine is when I am in the process of rush building howitzers or stealth fighters.

[Smash]

I was playin around with some marines today and I found they are pretty useful in attacking and capturing those fortresses the ai loves to build.Unfortunately the ai didnt have walls or coastals yet and I'm not patient enough to wait for them.Also as they hugged a coastline heading to cities, they were able to carry out coastal barrages and pick off the odd unit left on a coast.This kept my escort ship from taking any damage and thus keeping it at maximum defensive ability.

There are probably several tactical situations where marines might be useful.

[johnmcd]

I must say it sounds like you play a very different game of civ to me smash. Probably a more interesting one. My idea of tactics in civ warfare is to build forty odd howies and drive through twenty enemy cities a turn.
Does anyone else give the AI railroad early to make sure you can conquer at the speed of light?

diety level affects the random number which you and your opponent get in order to decide who gets the hit. to really find out if they are useful or not, you've got to try at MP

------------------
Alien Infiltrate

[Smash]

johnmcd...probably not,I just try out all kinds of stuff mainly for MP where 1 strategy doesn't work.I'm trying to learn how to be strategically flexible.

[johnmcd]

I guess I've never played MP...
Thats probably why I'm here, and not playing Civ.

[Jefferson Davis]

I think the smartest use of Marines is to build port facilities instead.
Alpine troops are better and you can make better amphibious assaults with veteran ships. If you haven't gotten to alpine troops yet THEN I could see building marines.

[MartinS]

Coastal fortresses DO affect marines attacking from the ocean. I have experienced it myself. I´m not sure about city walls though.

The best way to use marines, in my opinion, is to use them to defend cities near the enemy, because marines have got both high defense- and attack factors. If the enemy puts his units near your city, you can attack him before he attacks you.

[Scouse Gits]

MartinS - I think you've got it - but we'd rather have cavalry!!

SG[1&2]

[MartinS]

But cavalry has only 3 in defence. Marines have 5. What if the enemy attacks you first?

[Scouse Gits]

The double movement of cavalry is the important factor. Great for "aggressive defence" as they can deal with trouble before it reaches your city. (there is a current thread which mentions the benefits of defending with armor - because of the 3 movement) Cavalry units are really earlier versions of tanks.

[Theben]

I've never had proof one way or another, but from experience I believe marines are affected by coastal fortresses and not by city walls. And no unit kills a pop point when attacking from the sea-allowing bombers a choice when attacking a port city w/o walls.

[Jeff B]

a)When marines attack from the ocean, will city walls be effective?

ANSWER: YES. Always. And at exactly the 3X factor they should, even at diety levels, though the "trend" of "luck" (eg, the computer resoulution of battle) may be against you in the short term at times.


b)When marines attack from the ocean, will coastal fortress be effective?

ANSWER: NO. Coastal Fortress has NO EFFECT during ANY land unit attack, including Marines attacking from a transport.


c)When marines attack from the ocean and win, will the city population decrease?

ANSWER: NO. Never, if atttacking a unit defending the city. But when no defenders are left, and a marine finally moves into and captures the city, that city's population will be reduced by one.

FURTHER NOTE: By the way, the computer can (and does) attack from the ocean with any of it's land combat units (not just marines). It can TAKE an unoccupied coastal city with any land unit but diplomat, spy, caravan, or freight (Dips and spies will bribe, though). For example, a computer civ's horseman will take an unoccupied one land unit ocean human city directly from a caravel, trireme, galleon, frigate, or transport. The human player is never allowed to do that! The human is forced to use a marine, paratrooper, or helicopter when the circumstances are reversed (or just incite a revolt).


GENERAL COMMENTS ABOUT MARINES:

1. Useful for attacking from transports... do not bother to build non-vet marines unless opponents are way behind in technology. if you build them, make them vets. At least, n don't attack cities with walls unless they are vets. A healthy vet marine has a 50-50 chance of winning agains a non-vet, non-fortified defending rifleman behind city walls.

2. Marines are severely hampered by movement. You need RRs to move and attack on land.

3. Marines generally do not merit production in great numbers... their usefulness is limited to a very limited number of circumstances, assuming you are aggressive and looking for bang for your buck.

4. If you do build marines, build them only with veteran status! That is critical for successful attacking (though usually not for defending... it is less cost-effective to build a bunch of "defensive" marines).

5. A semi-useful strategy is to put marines in a transport and use them to destroy enemy units along a coastline. The marine will recover from damage on subsequent turns (of course), and can attack again later. But this is not cost-effective if the enemy has a strong naval or air element nearby.

[Theben]

Nice post, but:

"The human player is never allowed to [occupy an empty city from the ocean, using a non-marine unit]! The human is forced to use a marine, paratrooper, or helicopter when the circumstances are reversed (or just incite a revolt)."

This is just plain wrong. I can't count how many times I have done this. A player can use any land-based combat unit to occupy an empty city, even when attacking from a transport.

This makes me question your other findings.

[Campo]

Theban, my experience has been consistent with Jeff B's. Recently I played a game in which there was an AI city on a one-square island. I bombed it until there were no units left and tried to move in with alpine troups from a transport. It wouldn't let me, saying that my unit had to land first (which of course it couldn't because there was not other square to land on). I ended up going in with a helicopter.
Could there be a difference in versions? I was playing MGE.

[Theben]

Campo,
I play MGE. I just tested it to be sure, and it was consistent with my experience. I took two cities, one on a one-square island with a settler! Every version I've played I've been able to do this.

[Grishnakh]

A settler is a "non-offensive" unit, it has an attack value of zero, maybe that explains the difference?

[Scouse Gits]

Whilst on the subject of one square islands -I recently built a trireme in such a place - which promptly sank - presumably as the program had told it was surrounded by water! I play 2.42. Is it a bug? (Sounds horrible when it breaks up and drops to the ocean floor)
-------
Scouse Git (2)

[Campo]

Originally posted by Grishnakh on 12-14-1999 10:06 AM
A settler is a "non-offensive" unit, it has an attack value of zero, maybe that explains the difference?

Theben,
Can you test this? I'm at work so I can't check until tonight. I was definitely using military units; I've never taken a city with anything else. I didn't even know you could.

[Theben]

I took one city with a horseman and another with the settler. You can even take cities with explorers if you wish. All kinds of units work, ex. dip/spies and caravan/freight.

ScouseG, I've never heard of that either.
[This message has been edited by Theben (edited December 14, 1999).]

[Sten Sture]

SG(2), (Henchoz?) - that is the first I've heard of that one, thanks for the warning. Must have been the Vasa.