The end of civilization as we know it - Page 4

Frank Johnson · January 8, 2002, 12:44

Well he's right once you have railroad the easiest way to destroy a huge attacking stack is to move all your artillery in range, pound the hell of ouf the whole stack, which hopefully just landded or got its first move in, then counter attack with everything you've got. If you have artillery, it doesnt really matter what the counter attack force is, it could be infantry, cavalry, tanks........when units have one hit point they tend to lose.

On the other side of the coin, before rail roads, naval deployment is the only choice you have to defend yourself, not only from invasion, but from rampant shore bombing that can ruin your game chances almost as badly as an invasion.

Species8472 · January 9, 2002, 08:37

Quote:

True enough... but just think of the cost for unit support to do this

I presume you guys are still playing 1x1x.

Ofcourse the upkeep is a problem, but because of the slow movement, you dont have to put units on slow terrain like hills, mountain, forrest, swamp and bush.

Only on grass and plains remains to be filled with units. If you set bribe on, then 2 units per square. You can avoid upkeep a little by using a diplomat as second unit to stack. That leaves only 1 unit for upkeep on the shores. That leads for a 1 side coastal line to a maximum upkeep of 6 shields to protect it against naval early landfalls (triremes and caravals). This is in the worsed scenario. mostly 2 shields is enough in upkeep. If you put them in a forrest, it is a very effective defense even in democracy or republic. In the other government types upkeep is not such a big problem.

rah · January 9, 2002, 12:04

Is my mind getting even more feeble or were we discussing CIV III, and Species8472 posted without reading far enough back in the thread to realize it. OR what?

Ming · January 9, 2002, 12:07

Quote:

Originally posted by rah
Is my mind getting even more feeble or were we discussing CIV III, and Species8472 posted without reading far enough back in the thread to realize it. OR what?

Nahhh... not feeble at all (well, not proved by this anyway

)
Yeah... Species made the assumption that this was a Civ II mp strategy thread since it appeared in the Civ II forum

rah · January 9, 2002, 13:14

Opps, I forgot that it was set up this way to be descreet for MarkG's sake. Sorry Species. Maybe it is proof of feebleness.

Carry on.

Rich

Species8472 · January 10, 2002, 14:00

ok, sorry that i didnt know that now that civIII is out, all forums of civ2 must ofcourse be hijacked.

rah · January 10, 2002, 15:34

Not actually. This thread was used for us old time CIVII MP players to talk about CIV III and the potential for MP without all the crybabies that post in the CIV III forums. I care more about the people's opinion in this forum that those that have never played MP in their life.

RAH
Please feel free to start more II threads, lord knows we need them. Quite a few of us are still playing MP.

Species8472 · January 11, 2002, 15:34

i still play deity 1x1x MP games every day. there are plenty people who still play.

rah · January 11, 2002, 18:52

We play 2x1x games twice a week still.

Rich