A Use for bombardment?

[Sava]

I've found that bombardments are almost useless because the production required to get a decent artillery/bomber force needed to have an impact on city bombing could be better spent on tanks. But having said that, I have found that if I have shields to spend, there is a use for bombing.

I tend to enjoy bombing tile improvements during an invasion or war. This prevents reinforcements from getting to the front fast as well as hurts the collection of food, shields, and trade. This can have a devestating effect on research, as well as the economy of your enemy. Does anyone else utilize bombing in such a fashion? I tend to destroy just about all tile-improvements, cutting off the enemy from resources, trade, and from reinforcing isolated units.

[AJ Corp. The FAIR]

Actually I think there is a broad consensus here at Apolyton that bombardment (artillery) is very usefull and actually too strong, as the AI doesn't seem to be able to use it properly.

Imagine a game where you're experiencing difficulties to become the strongest power, imagine you being attacked by a stronger/bigger army: using your own terrain capabilities and having a big artillery can make the difference between losing your cities or destroying the opponet's invading armies. Use the arts to knock their HP's down and kill them with other units.

Tanks of course are usefull as well, but if you can mass produce those units, it implies you're in a winning position already I suppose

AJ

[CerberusIV]

Maybe it depends on difficulty level or map size (I am currently on Monarch and standard maps) but I usually build 20 bombers and about 30 tanks plus 4 armies for the tanks to go in and only a handful of artillery, mainly for coastal defence.

I actually increased the shield cost of many of the Industrial/Modern units yet I have no problem with producing this force level and could usually double the tank force if I needed to. It takes a while to pick off an AI city by city but it works.

I only bother to bomb strategic resources to deny them to the enemy as I want the RR's for my own use, such as bringing in infantry to garrison captured cities.

[AJ Corp. The FAIR]

Bombing is also good for crippling enemy metropolises:

imagine yourself trying to invade a small but good defended enemy island that has some big metropolises on it. If you have enough time, bring in your ships and carriers and bomb all tile improvements around the metropolises, especially those belonging to the AI capital.

Results: after a while metropolises become cities/towns
(easier to conquer) and if you manage to cut off the capital or luxury roads, the AI might fall into anarchy.

I've used this tactic a couple of times, most succesfully when one isolated civ tried building the Manhattan Project, whilst the others didn't. As I always try not to experience nukes in my games, I crippled the producing city by mass bombardments, so that it would take centuries to complete this wonder, meanwhile preparing my invading forces to take control of this 'axis of evil'

AJ

[Spec]

Weakening units before they hit your cities....if the bombardement goes well, they will probably turn back before they even attack. HA!


Spec.

[Jaybe]

Originally posted by CerberusIV
...
I actually increased the shield cost of many of the Industrial/Modern units ...

Tanks/Panzer, Mech Infantry: 120 shields
Modern Armor: 160

[Capt Dizle]

Replaceable parts is only three techs deep into the age, therefore you can field huge stacks of artillery and infantry to soften up enemy cities.

Use cavalry for assault units and garner easy wins even if the enemy has infantry. This will result in leaders.

This can easily lead to a conquest win prior to discovering tanks or flight.

Best combined with a large prebuild of cannon and the ability to upgrade at half price.

[Theseus]

Bombarding SODs to the redline and destroying them with inferior units... one of the great joys in life.

Bombarding the resources of distant AI civs, just to generally f-ck up their day... also a lot of fun.

Bombarding cities with useful GWs done to 1 pop... priceless.

[badams52]

Sava:

I usually don't bombard tile improvements cause I'm gonna take the city anyway and I'd rather not have my workers rebuilding the roads to make the city usable again. If I want to take out a resource (iron, oil, saltpeter, etc.) then I'll send in an army of cavalry, knights, tanks or other fast moving units (stacked with one other unit of the same if pre PTW) and pillage the road to the resource. The army is for pure defensive purposes as the AI refrains from attacking units when it has less than 10% chance of winning, and an army of 3 cavs won't be attacked until tanks arrive.

Most of my wars are overkill with the number of units I have, and the AI is sitting back in defense only mode with the occasional offensive unit on the attack, so I actually use bombardment by artillery only (fighters are a pain in the but) to knock the city down to size so that taking it will have much less chance for CF. But if the civ in question is close to extermination, I won't bombard and just take the city.

The other good use of bombardment is if the AI has a navy and is bombarding your coast, use rails + artillery or just bombers and knock down some HP to clean up with battleships or other naval forces.

I don't build cannons or catapults though and wait for artillery.

[Odin]

Artillery works best for defense in the WWI era, with Infantry but no tanks, a.k.a. Trench Warfare. I use them to soften up enemy stacks then send Geurillas and Cavalry to mop up the mess.

[nationalist]

Originally posted by AJ Corp. The FAIR
. As I always try not to experience nukes in my games,

Why no Nukes? Sometimes they can really save your ass, and can totally devastate a rival civ. The global warming isn't that bad if you have been managing your pollution levels and don't use hundreds of nukes.

[epics]

Originally posted by badams52

The other good use of bombardment is if the AI has a navy and is bombarding your coast, use rails + artillery or just bombers and knock down some HP to clean up with battleships or other naval forces.

Battleships may just walk away for 3 tiles from the shores and you can just say "Aloha" to them with your artillery.


Does any of you use fighters for bombardment? I don't, they can't make any damage neither to improvments nor units.

[BigDork]

Theseus...

You made me think of something that I'm sure you all do but has never occured to me. Using artillery with cavalry. Once they become obsolete you can use the artillery to red line a SOD, as you said, and then defeat them with cavalry. Hrm...actually not a bad idea. I bet you I've read it a bunch of times before different threads and it never occured to me.

I like to use bombardment to hit strategic resources so the AI can't use them during war. I usually use naval vessals to hit those next to the sea and bombers/fighters for those more inland. I also build some bombers and will bombard a city before I take it.

BigD

[yxhuvud]

bigdork: You really don't need cavalry if you have artillery. Just a few infantry and a lot of artillery.

The attack power of infantry is more than enough, since it usually takes a few turns to grind down a city anyhow.

[Don Giovanni]

All the games that I've won so far on Emperor/Deity - 5 or 6, I think - have been decided during the first 20 or so turns after Replacable parts. I usually build about 30 artillery units, then declare war and then continue to build 10-15 additional units. A stack of 40-45 units can decimate most major cities/metros, within a couple of turns, while taking no casualties. When all defenders (even infantry) are left with only one hit point, and the town is below size 7, my cavalry units deal with the rest.

A stack of artillery units is still useful after motorized transportation. You will experience much lower casualties, hence many elite units (tanks), and leaders.

I almost feel like cheating, because the AI is unable to use artillery in the offense

[BigDork]

Originally posted by yxhuvud
bigdork: You really don't need cavalry if you have artillery. Just a few infantry and a lot of artillery.

The attack power of infantry is more than enough, since it usually takes a few turns to grind down a city anyhow.

This is true. However I usually end up with a bunch of cavalry left over once tanks appear and this gives them something to do.

BigD

[badams52]

Originally posted by epics
Battleships may just walk away for 3 tiles from the shores and you can just say "Aloha" to them with your artillery.

Does any of you use fighters for bombardment? I don't, they can't make any damage neither to improvments nor units.

Did you notice I also mentioned using bombers? And sometimes, the battleships still end up hanging around too close.

I usually don't use fighters for bombardment. They're best for ruling the skies when the AI has bombers. But if the AI doesn't have bombers, can't let the fighters go to waste. 1 hit in every 5-10 fighters attack still helps.

[Theseus]

I've had some very tough games... KAI civs waaaay ahead of me, with both Infantry and Tanks well before me.

Arty = lifesaver.

[Sava]

I also start building my artillery/cannon/catapult regiments early in the game. By the time I can upgrade to artillery, I usually have close to 30-40 units of that type. It's much easier to just upgrade and carry over a force, rather than build up after you discover a tech.

[epics]

Originally posted by badams52


Did you notice I also mentioned using bombers.

Yes I did but just said that this strategy is useless in this situation. Many other players use it too.

[AJ Corp. The FAIR]

Originally posted by nationalist


Why no Nukes? Sometimes they can really save your ass, and can totally devastate a rival civ. The global warming isn't that bad if you have been managing your pollution levels and don't use hundreds of nukes.

I just don't like the kind of game it becomes when nukes are involved. I like cities to prosper, don't like nuclear ruining of major cities.

I actually never have experienced nuclear wars in civ3: or I've won the game already, or I prevent other civs building the Manhattan Project, by crippling and/or conquering the city set to build the wonder.

AJ

[Catt]

As much as I'd like to say I enjoy bombard units . . . I don't have a lot of use for them until artillery. I am unwilling to actually build catapults and cannons for an artillery upgrade unless I'm engaged in a drawn-out engagement as I approach Replacealbe Parts. A few cannons may be useful; and a few cats are useful in the rare circumstance; but in most games, bombardment units seem to me to be a bad investment of shields and gpt until artillery.

The big problem is that the AI overvalues bombardment pre-artillery, and dramatically undervalues bombarment post-artillery.

Airborne bombardment (bombers, fighters, and later stealth units) strikes me as too expensive to make sense in most games, though I readily acknowledge that there are instances when it is very valuable.

Catt

[badams52]

Originally posted by Sava
I also start building my artillery/cannon/catapult regiments early in the game. By the time I can upgrade to artillery, I usually have close to 30-40 units of that type. It's much easier to just upgrade and carry over a force, rather than build up after you discover a tech.

Maybe so, but I don't use catapults or cannons, so why waste the gpt on them. By the time artillery becomes available, I have at least a couple of cities that will be able to produce about 1 every 2 turns and eventually get to the 1 every turn phase, so building up artillery forces is quick. I'm also usually in peace (after conquering my own continent) till tanks (or MA) anyway. Cav vs. Inf wars

[Theseus]

Originally posted by Catt
Airborne bombardment (bombers, fighters, and later stealth units) strikes me as too expensive to make sense in most games, though I readily acknowledge that there are instances when it is very valuable.

Population reduction.

At the end of AU206, before I got crashed out of the game, I had set up a huge fleet in the western sea... 4 Carriers, umpteen Battleships and Destroyers, and many Bombers and Fighters.

I had full range to most enemy cities, and had a lot of fun with the repeat bombard feature... 12 Bombers, again and again, do an awful lot of damage. Next time I do it, I'll go with more... 20-30 Bombers in a stack.

Hmm hmm good.

[Catt]

Originally posted by Theseus


Population reduction.

At the end of AU206, before I got crashed out of the game, I had set up a huge fleet in the western sea... 4 Carriers, umpteen Battleships and Destroyers, and many Bombers and Fighters.

I had full range to most enemy cities, and had a lot of fun with the repeat bombard feature... 12 Bombers, again and again, do an awful lot of damage. Next time I do it, I'll go with more... 20-30 Bombers in a stack.

Hmm hmm good.

Though it sounds fun, that's a huge investment for relatively little battle damage - not just shields but also gpt. Pop reduction isn't usually high on my list of priorities (though occasionally it is), but when it is, a small stack of arty with proper defense (i.e., swap out battleships and destroyers for infantry) under seems to pack more power than a stack of bombers.

Catt

[Theseus]

Actually, what I left off saying was that there was a HUGE amount of AI naval power, and my fleet also destroyed dozens enemy ships...

Between that and the dramatic reduction in AI production power and defensive strength due to pop reduction, I felt the fleet was more than justified.

And yes, it was a LOT of fun!

[ShadowStalker]

I know a lot of people don't like to mod anything in thier games, but on the subject of getting the AI to use Artillary on the offensive is somewhat possible through the editor.

I changed archers, longbows, guerillas, and bowmen to all have a bombard attack, I flagged them offense and defense, and give them all zero range bombarb values.

The AI makes Archers, Longbows, and Guerillas, and uses them both as offense and defense, and when you attack a stack of them it is like them having artillary.

No, they don't bring artillary to your cities and bombarb them still down to red before attacking them (at least that I have seen), but they at least have some sort of artillary for defense in thier stacks that you will attack.

Just thought I would throw that out there for anyone interested.

[Catt]

Originally posted by Theseus
Actually, what I left off saying was that there was a HUGE amount of AI naval power, and my fleet also destroyed dozens enemy ships...

I do agree that air bombardment is valuable for countering large naval forces. In fact, IMHO, countering a much stronger AI navy is one of those instances where I think air bombardment can be worth it's investment.

But I'd still say that building a significant air bombard capability with a goal of enemy pop reduction in mind is inefficient compared to other tactics available.

Catt

[Jaybe]

Continuous Bombard (shift-b), whether from artillery (range at 2) or from bombers, works quite nicely and is really cool. EXCEPT when you keep on being prompted to move units that you want to move AFTER the bombardments!

[Chemical Ollie]

Originally posted by Sava
...

This prevents reinforcements from getting to the front fast as well as hurts the collection of food...

Did you learn this from Saddam?