Cossacks

[Generalissimo]

Ive kind of stumbled upon it, but on my recent game with the russians ive found how this units are effective,
somewhere up until the industrial age youre getting a unit that have the best attack and mobility figures in the game and the best defence until nationalty(Rifeman).
Ive found them extremely useful in terrorizing persian cities

anybody else have any expiernce in cossack warfare?

[Frank Johnson]

But when you consider nationality and military tradition are separated by like maybe 8-12 turns, how effective is that ability? Although its true it makes Russian cavalry slightly more annoying, espically if they are ahead in tech.

[Generalissimo]

Thats true,
but if got a tech lead over the AI or you just went straight to military tradition. you gain a decent time space to assemble a cossack task force and get some terrtorial gains.
besides cavalry and cavalry based units are not useless against riflemen, i think that against infantry and mech. infantry they become cannon fodders.

[bongo]

I consider cavalry to be one of the top 'Let's conquer the world NOW' units. If you have a large force of knights just waiting to get upgraded, the money to do it and the enemy is 8-10 turns away from nationalism then you have just the advantage you need to roll over several AI civs.

[pedrojedi]

The Ottoman UU (forgot its name) seems more useful: it's greater attack can make lot's of damage, even in disadvantage when compared to infantry. They are a real top "let's conquer the world NOW" (that's gonna be a new term here, bongo! ) unit.

[Louis XXIV]

The Russians have advantage early (although not much).

They are Expansionist, so they start out with a scout.
They are also Scientific (giving them Bronze Working)

Because of this, you never have to build a Warrior (Spearman for Defense, Scouts for, well, Scouting)

Nationalism is near Military Tradition so the Cossak's defense is not as valuble as the Ottoman Sipahi's offense.

[TheArsenal]

Originally posted by pedrojedi
The Ottoman UU (forgot its name) seems more useful: it's greater attack can make lot's of damage, even in disadvantage when compared to infantry. They are a real top "let's conquer the world NOW" (that's gonna be a new term here, bongo! ) unit.

Agreed. The superior movement, I think its 7, make this one of my favorite UUs by far.

[bongo]

I think it's an attack value of 8, not a movement value of 7(THAT would be weird), but I agree. It's the best of the cavalry units.

During the game there are several point where a window of opportunity opens if you can get a tech lead. In my opinion military tradition is the greatest, followed by motorized transportation. Iron working, horseback riding and chivalry are also goodies for warmongerers like myself

Let's conquer the world NOW

[badams52]

Who needs a tech lead? Archer rushes, or my favorite, swordsmen SODs. Swordsmen work wonders till feudalism is found. And they are still very effective against ironless societies.

Plus, the AI is so bad at fighting, that any war with superior numbers will win.

But I must admit, I still love rolling over backwards civs with my MA. MA v. Infantry or riflemen. It's much harder to get a tech lead in Civ III compared to the two previous civs.

[minke19104]

I hate doing Tanks vs MI wars.... Way too much casualties..

In Modern Times I usually go the bottom techs first to get Internet Wonder. But I ended up giving everybody, including my enemy MI...

[Louis XXIV]

Originally posted by bongo
I think it's an attack value of 8, not a movement value of 7(THAT would be weird), but I agree. It's the best of the cavalry units.

During the game there are several point where a window of opportunity opens if you can get a tech lead. In my opinion military tradition is the greatest, followed by motorized transportation. Iron working, horseback riding and chivalry are also goodies for warmongerers like myself

Let's conquer the world NOW

Does Cavalry have an attack of 7 our 8?

I can't remember off the top of my head, but I thought
Cavalry was 6.3.3
Cossak's were 6.4.3 and
Sipahi's were 7.3.3

Am I wrong?

[Catt]

Originally posted by Louis XXIV
I can't remember off the top of my head, but I thought
Cavalry was 6.3.3
Cossak's were 6.4.3 and
Sipahi's were 7.3.3

Am I wrong?

Just on the last one -- Sipahi have an attack of 8. You're rememebring correctly on the other two units.

Catt

[nbarclay]

Originally posted by bongo
I consider cavalry to be one of the top 'Let's conquer the world NOW' units. If you have a large force of knights just waiting to get upgraded, the money to do it and the enemy is 8-10 turns away from nationalism then you have just the advantage you need to roll over several AI civs.

What's even nastier is 60 or so horsemen, a nice tech lead, a pile of cash, and Leonardo's Workshop. Say bye-bye. (I've been known to deliberately avoid getting Chivalry in order to build massive forces of horsemen for upgrade directly to cavalry.)

[vmxa1]

Originally posted by Louis XXIV


Does Cavalry have an attack of 7 our 8?

I can't remember off the top of my head, but I thought
Cavalry was 6.3.3
Cossak's were 6.4.3 and
Sipahi's were 7.3.3

Am I wrong?

Probably the PTW manual confused you as it said the Sipahi were 7, but they are 8.

[Louis XXIV]

Actually, I don't have PTW.

I was looking on Civ3's web site.

Thanks for the info

8.3.3! Ouch, that's powerful

They should raise the Cossak's defense to 5, just to be fair.

BTW, I can't remember about Chinese Riders either.
The web site says 4.4.3, I see a lot of sites say 4.3.3.
Which is it?
(The manual is no hope, saying 2.2.2, replaces Horseman)

Thanks again.

[badams52]

If I remember correctly, riders are knights with one extra movement point: 4.3.3

[Arrian]

Riders, my favorite UU, are 4.3.3.
Samurai are 4.4.2.

There is no 2.2.2 unit.

The Siphai are very powerful, though they are a bit more expensive than Cavalry (100 shields as opposed to 80). Still, their extra attack power makes it more than worth it.

I find Cossacks unimpressive. It's not a bad unit, but rather a so-so one. Couple that with a trait combo (exp/sci) that I think ranks as one of the weakest in the game and yuck.

-Arrian

[Verto]

I rarely play as the Russians, for the reasons that Arrian stated above. Better UU's and traits to choose from.

[Odin]

I like Siphais because they are the ONLY unit that can go after Infantrymen without having to haul 20 artillery units around enemy territory to soften them up a lot and let my infantry and geurillas get slaughted going "over the top" of my trenches.

[Sava]

Originally posted by Louis XXIV
The Russians have advantage early (although not much).

They are Expansionist, so they start out with a scout.
They are also Scientific (giving them Bronze Working)

Because of this, you never have to build a Warrior (Spearman for Defense, Scouts for, well, Scouting)

Nationalism is near Military Tradition so the Cossak's defense is not as valuble as the Ottoman Sipahi's offense.

I agree. I don't like mounted UU's because I tend to build lots of horsemen, and horsemen can't be upgraded to Cossacks.

[TheArsenal]

Originally posted by bongo I think it's an attack value of 8, not a movement value of 7(THAT would be weird), but I agree. It's the best of the cavalry units.

D'oh! Good catch. I meant to say, "with the increased movement and superior attack value" .

[Brizey]

Originally posted by Sava

I agree. I don't like mounted UU's because I tend to build lots of horsemen, and horsemen can't be upgraded to Cossacks.

Why can't horsemen be upgraded to Cossacks? I thought all the UU's were now in the upgrade paths after one of the patches.

Most of the time I bee-line to miltrad, so it is way more than 8-12 turns to nationalism. Besides, I rarely research nationalism anyway. It is not on the way to 'parts, industialization, or electronics. I always do the pre-build for Darwin to jump to electronics while I pre-build for Hoover thing. Nationalism gets in the way of this, and you can usually get 'parts while darwins is being built.

If you bee-line to miltrad with a well-timed golden age (ah, those wonderful chinese and french), you can have more than 8-12 turns before everyone has rifles.

[RéþrìsaL]

Ive been drawn to play as the Chinese alot more recently. I am often in a position to build a multitude of Riders and find no trouble in maintaining an up-to-date army, especially as it can be troublesome attaining leonardos workshop at the very hard difficulty levels.

I am now at the point where I reckon I could challenge anyone. Regardless.

[Master Zen]

Forget a quick victory with cavalry once your foe has Replaceable Parts (and a supply of rubber). You'll have to slog it the hard way: massive artillery WW1 style.

The Ottoman Siphai gives the regular Cavalry a bit more punch. Still I think the best time for a horse-based army to strike is when they have Knights. Here's the reasons:

Knights will face their most fearsome opponents in Musketmen (defense of 4) although they have a considerable window of opportunity while your enemy has Pikemen still (and if they don't have saltpeter better yet, the AI is slow on upgrading at this stage too)

So lets imagine Knights vs Pikemen. 4 vs 3.75. Many enemy cities at this stage will not be over size 6. Against cities it's 4 vs 5.625.

Basic odds are 1:0.94 and 1:1.4

By stacking your knights with a defensive unit, they can strike next to a city and retire if losing, saving you many casualties.

Now, Cavalry vs. Musketmen is 6 vs 5. Vs Riflemen its 6 vs. 7.5. However, a larger proportion of cities at this time are over size 6 so the defense gets a huge advantage (50%). Proportions are now 6 vs 7.5 vs Musketmen and 6 vs 11.25

The odds are thus 1 vs 1.25 and 1 vs 1.875, much higher than with Knights.

Of course, people will argue that canons even up the odds but if that is so then better wait till Artillery is available as it is much more effective and you have a larger industrial base for a massive Arty rush. The point is winning quickly and Knights IMO are better than Cav at this.

[bongo]

The reason I view cavalry as the strongest unit is because of industrial strength. My productive capacity is usually much higher(in new units per turn) when I discover military tradition than it is when I discover chivalry. That extra movement point also helps

I see your point though and I will try to adjust my style of play so that I will have enough industrial strength to produce lots of knight next time I discover chivalry.

I totally agree that when the enemy has replacable parts any cavalry unit drops from 'strong' to 'mostly harmless' on the power rating.

[Master Zen]

Bongo,

You don't need industrial strength to build Knights. Simply hoard a bunch of Horsemen during the middle/late ancient era, they will be relatively easy to build if you dedicate just a few, say 4, cities solely to military production. Then, once you get chivalry you simply upgrade them.

It's pretty easy to get as much as 30 knights in a few turns like this, from excess horsemen

[MPatton]

where do you get 8 turns to to 12 turns what do you assume that the user gets all the peaceful stuff then military tradition. Once I get into industrial I go towards gunpowder first then get theology and astronomy and then military tradition. Then I have the rest of the era to get the other stuff.

[AzTecA GoD]

You people should consider ancient era warefar. That is one of the best times to make a rush against the A.I. Since the A.I. is gonna have a 2 spear base, and will rush one, you can easily stomp any deffence with a massed horsemen over 30-40.

Of course this is hard to do quickly, but, they kept the almighty chariot. So you can simply make chariots while you research horse riding, and when you get it, you could have nearly 15 horsemen ready to kill the A.I. that is still using warrior probably.

It is all simple strategics: The A.I. never has a decent defence or offense in the Ancient Age, meaning you can whipe out many of them befor one or two make it to pikeman, even then, you can just steal it from them and depirve them.

[Cort Haus]

I think the Russians are under-rated. Even on standard maps the expansionist trait has 3 benefits:

(1) Good chance of early tech lead and less barbs thru scout - at least you can get 'in the loop'.
(2) Earlier contact and map uncovery means more & cheaper techs and money thru map trading.
(3) Granary off the bat. I've only just discovered how powerful an early granary is - especially on a river - thanks to discussions on 'Poly.

If scientific civs beeline for literacy and get their cheap libs up quick, they can out-culture the religious civs - and then the monotheistic (ironic!) leg-up towards education via the Sistine does nicely for the builder. The later free techs are very useful too.

I faced a Russian super-power recently in a game where the only oil was at the southern tip of their large empire. I had a good tech lead, but no navy against their 15+ ironclads, so sea assault was impossible, and no tanks without oil. They were some way off Refining but had Replaceable Parts, so it was down to a WW1 arty-bombardment with mass pillaging to painfully take down their core, using 30-40 arty to pound their defending infantry before applying cavalry to finish them off.

Meanwhile, their Cossacks were notably harder to get rid of than cavalry, especially when retreating to mountains, hills or jungle. I'm not saying the Cossack's a rockin' UU, but given the importance of cavalry in the game, a more durable version can't be so bad - especially when it comes to defending taken cities.

[Wazell]

Hey, it's not necessary to get Military Tradition before Nationalism. You could research all the medieval techs needed to get industrial age, then take Nationalism, and only after that start researching MT. Won't happen too often, but it all depends on the game situation.