Naval Blockades and the AI - Page 2

Primus40 · May 9, 2002, 02:07

On topic: No I have never seen the AI use the naval blockade strategy.

Realted to topic: But that doesn't mean we can't use it effectively in the game. There are other reasons to use the blockade strategy besides preventing trade - embargo/war combinations are a better means of achieving that goal.

Examples:
Small localized blockades to prevent troop build up -
Once when I was at war with the Aztecs (on my continent) and effectively wiping the floor with them, Rome decided to come from afar and plop a city in one of those little gaps created by a razed city. I knew what they were up to; this was a point of entry for their own soon-to-be-launched campaign. I have noticed that the AI will jump on the band wagon of your victory march over another civ and snatch up towns and cities you have weakened. So I quickly dispatched all the close ironclads available and began building (1 turn) the remaining needed. Built a small arc just outside the borders and sure enough about three turns after here come the onslaught of transports, filled to the brim. Since I wasn't encroaching and was at peace with Rome they just sat around outside my blockade moving in frustrated circles.

I have also used this on costal cities where I wish to establish an entry point - developed when, after knocking one down waiting on my marines, Rome (is this a habit with them?) sneaks in at the last minute, takes the city and gets their own entry point!

Large scale blockades using choke points -
This one depends on a "friendly" map that has practical choke points. This one is also used to prevent campaigns against your continent. But once, Ms. Joan was really being a steady pain in the A$$, coming from afar. I effectively choked narrow gaps between friendly civs continents. One near the equator, and then both polar sections. I was located along the southern region of my continent and went to the far side and choked it off to close the backdoor. Other civs to my north and east protected my land area borders. Then I used ships, located about five squares off my largest civ facing coast and spaced with the corners of their sight range jsut touching to create an early warning and attack "blockade" of my own coast. Nobody snuck up on me the rest of the game.

Just some ideas on blockading.

notyoueither · May 9, 2002, 03:21

How about if a city at war with enemy warships fortified in it's radius gets no gold from sea squares?

If all coastal cities are so effected, then no Resources or Luxuries can flow through any of those ports.

BTW. Total blockade is very, very, very difficult to implement IRL. The British tried it against Nappy. Nappy in turn tried a continental blockade against them. Neither were entirely effective.

You need complete and overwhelming dominance of the seas to maintain a total blockade. It is nearly impossible in Civ3, except against island powers. Just as IRL.

I can only think of one example of it actually working, ever. The USN had Japan blockaded from sometime in very late 1944, or early 45.

nato · May 9, 2002, 03:46

I like your no trade arrows idea a lot NYE. That would work fine for me.

Yeah, total blockades are near impossible because there simply aren't enough ships to cover all the coastline.

However, partial blockade is very possible, and can be very damaging. Obviously the big example is German U-Boats in both World Wars. They never cut off Britain completely, but they were sure hurting them.

Thats why blockade shouldn't be an all-or-nothing thing like it is now. My idea would work, and your idea would work great as well.

I particularly like your part about "If all coastal cities are so effected, then no Resources or Luxuries can flow through any of those ports. " This is really great because it allows an approach that isn't all-or-nothing to effect the all-or-nothing resources and luxuries.

It would still be really nice to get some sort of extra bonus for submarines though, to make them unique and useful. Not sure what that could be in your model though.

Anyway, if you combined this with bombers hitting terrain improvements, then economic warfare is a real option! Oh yeah, sidenote, in the blockade of Japan you mentioned, the most effective part by far was the mines dropped by bombers in the ports.

Great idea! Except for the subs, I like it as much as mine.

nato · May 9, 2002, 03:51

On second thought, I suppose subs might already be naturally more effective in your model then surface ships.

If they blockaded ports just like surface ships, but were still invisible, the port would be blockaded, but the victim wouldn't know exactly where the sub was that was doing it.

Ah well just a thought. I'm never sure how invisible subs really are...

notyoueither · May 9, 2002, 04:10

Yes. Things like subs are very difficult to reflect accurately in any game as abstract as Civ. I've played much more focused and 'realistic' board games on military topics and subs always come down to some fudge factor or other.

One thing you might give subs is that they do not have to be fortified, merely present (more mobility). Also maybe let them effect any city they are on the periphery of, as well as in the worked tiles themselves.

BTW. Wouldn't it be easy to spot the sub? Look for the 'empty' square that you cannot assign workers to in the city view. Does it work that way? I've never seen it. I rarely see subs.

Panag · May 9, 2002, 08:55

Quote:

Originally posted by HazieDaVampire
Does the AI get annoyed when you do it?

hi ,

yep , ......

and one thing you can also do is to destroy his roads , from the harbor's to the capital , then use P bombing to destroy the harbor , the AI will have his hands full even 20 after the war is over , ...

have a nice day

Deornwulf · May 9, 2002, 17:13

The implementation of trade in the game would need to be expanded to allow naval blockades to affect it. Trade routes would have to be visible aspects of the game instead of abstracted the way they are now. Ships can be used to literally block a civ from access to certain points on the map. I do this often on the water and on land to keep the AI from building on the primo spots.

Related to topic
I sort of miss the trade routes from Civ2, not for any strategic or gameplay value but for the nostalgia value. Trading is an important part of the diplomatic model in CivIII but Trade is not really a part of the game anymore.

HazieDaVampire · May 9, 2002, 17:17

What would be much better would be if you could actualy see ships going back and forth, and have subs blow them up.
Should a sub blow a transport ship up, all resources in it are lost, in the modern/late indust ages money shouldn't be lost when a ship goes down!

Admiral PJ · May 9, 2002, 17:42

Would be better if you could intercept trade ships/caravans , and also capture some of their cargo(not much as its hard to capture).

nato · May 9, 2002, 17:49

Yeah, it would be ideal if you could see actual trade ships, but I'm pretty certain that will never happen. It would add too much. I'm all for it though!

I think mine or NYE's idea would be more practical, and could effect trade on the abstract level it currently is on.

campmajor! · May 10, 2002, 06:51

To clarify my post: I meant a naval blockade to keep them from sending ships to my territority! Not to block trade because like everyone is saying that is useless, especially when there are airports...

But if you keep ships stationed outside their borders but near a strategic point where there is a gap which can be closed by a ship or ten, you can keep them contained.

Panag · May 10, 2002, 11:11

Quote:

Originally posted by campmajor!
To clarify my post: I meant a naval blockade to keep them from sending ships to my territority! Not to block trade because like everyone is saying that is useless, especially when there are airports...

But if you keep ships stationed outside their borders but near a strategic point where there is a gap which can be closed by a ship or ten, you can keep them contained.

hi ,

well many times the AI shall attack from its naval city , and it seems it gets a bonus that way , however only if your ship is right next to the AI (sea) city , .....

have a nice day

campmajor! · May 13, 2002, 07:17

Well, usually I have battleships there which are powerful enough to hold it for a while, but it is just a matter of having enough ships stationed there. If the opposition is strong, send more ships!

Panag · May 13, 2002, 12:43

Quote:

Originally posted by campmajor!
Well, usually I have battleships there which are powerful enough to hold it for a while, but it is just a matter of having enough ships stationed there. If the opposition is strong, send more ships!

hi ,

okay , the above sounds good , but lets take it a bit further now , ......

if you know that it shall be for a long time , send a settler and some other units there , build a city nearby , and buy a harbor , .....this way you have a foothold , and your ships can get repaired and you dont have to wait to cross half of the globe , ....

,.......and the airunits stationed there can create some havoc aswell, .....

have a nice day