Infantry too early?

The Rook · November 20, 2001, 16:25

Shouldn't Infantry and Tanks appear about the same time. Going by what uniforms they are wearing, Riflemen look to be about AMerican Civil War Era troops, whereas, Infantry are World War I type units. The problem I am seeing is there is a huge gap from the time infantry is developed, and the time a viable offensive unit (the tank) is invented to disloge them from the cities they are protecting.

I think Infantry and Tanks should appear at the same time. Artillery just isn't effective enough.

dr.charm · November 20, 2001, 16:34

I think of the infantry as being Boer War - WW2 era infantry, rather than WWI infantry.

And think about it. WWI was essentially a stalemate for three years before the tanks rolled in, it took time to develop something that could beat entrenched infantry. Mech Inf though? Way too early.

Cheers,

Dr. Charm

The Rook · November 20, 2001, 16:44

You are right about WWI, but 3 years is a very short time compared to the development of infantry and tanks in Civ3. I am at work, so I can't remember the tech tree from my head, but in the game, it's been well over 100 years since I developed infantry, and still have no tanks. Infantry with a def of 10 in a big city are ipossible to dislodge. The Russians were sending droves of Cossacks after me, and they couldn't do anything to move me.

I think I can take a city using a major bombardment strategy, but to get all the get in place would take decades, by that time, war weariness, has made your entire civ gone to pot.

Dis · November 20, 2001, 17:07

100 years!! how slow is your research?

but yes infantry can come very early if you beeline towards it. I usually do that so I can begin upgrading my units to infantry asap. But tanks can come early too if you want to.

The Rook · November 20, 2001, 17:12

In my latest game, I got infantry while the years were still going by in 2 year increments. I didn't make a beeline towards tanks, because I am not really a warmonger, but when war happens, I want to be able to do something about it.

dr.charm · November 20, 2001, 17:15

Just to make it clear, I don't think you can talk about time in any sort of real way in Civ3. I mean it takes infantry 1 year to walk across one square.

My point in noting that 3 years of stalemate existed is that infantry *were* impossible to dislodge for a 'long time'. In WWI the cavalry, which had been the military power of the previous 50? years, were worse than useless, chewed to pieces by entrenched infantry. In fact, in order to move forward, an army would have to bombard with artillery for a while, attack and move forward a little bit. The enemy would then attack the (now damaged) infantry that had moved forward and the attackers would be thrown back, or they wouldn't be and it would be grinding.

I think Civ3 does very well in this regard, because once you get to tanks, you can run over infantry fairly well. I think the timing is about right, if you do things correctly, you can have tanks less than 15 turns (usually 15 or 30 years) after gettting infantry. Which, in game terms, makes good sense.

However, fortresses, lacking ZOC as they do, when units are in them, suck.

Cheers,

Dr. Charm