 |
|
RedBird
|
|
Offensive armies have a clear advantage. They will destroy a unit without allowing it to get promoted between attacks. But what about armies on the defense? I'm thinking they're not worth it since it could allow multiple units to be destroyed by one (obviously strong) attacking unit. Where as, if the units are not in armies each attacker must end that attack (and their attacking for that turn if they don't have blitz) with the defeat of the defending unit.
I had been thinking of putting some infantry into a defense army (for defense out in the open), but now I've decided against it.
Anyone disagree with this logic?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Theseus
|
 |
The warmonger formerly known as rpodos. Gathering Storm! Apolyton Spirit!!
Apr 2002
time: 00:21
|
|
I do disagree... defensive Armies have many uses, and ARE stronger than the sum of the units individually.
In reverse order:
* Strength
Consider an Army of 3 vet Infantry. When attacked, the first two Infantry get the use of all 4 of their hps, rather than dying on the loss of the 4th.
This is even better when considering mixed-unit Armies... on each individual attacck, the best defensive unit always fights first, and always uses a full 1/3 of the total remaining hps.
Lastly, because a unit that wins two battles in the same turn is promoted, you will often see units in Armies at elite (if they weren't to begin with).
* Uses
First off, the AI usually avoids Armies. This is pretty powerful to begin with, but even if the AI regularly attacked defensive Armies, they're strong enough to absorb an awful lot of punishment.
Typically, I don't really use defensive Armies on defense.  I use them as protection for my offense... so if I have a forward rally point, on a mountain, say, the Army stays there, and protects units as they heal. Same goes for an intercontinental invasion.
When I do use them as actual defenders, it's usually a pretty extreme situation. In Vel's Alamo game, for instance, defensive MI Armies were critical, for me at least. And in the games where I have seen the best killer AI civs, defensive Armies have been critical (e.g., when the AI shows up with offensive stacks of Cavs or Tanks numbering in the 100s).
So, by all means, build defensive Armies. Or at least mixed-unit Armies with one good defender... for instance, 2x Tanks + 1x MI is a great multi-use tool.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
RedBird
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Theseus
I do disagree...
[...]
Consider an Army of 3 vet Infantry. When attacked, the first two Infantry get the use of all 4 of their hps, rather than dying on the loss of the 4th. |
Ah. Good point.
quote:
Lastly, because a unit that wins two battles in the same turn is promoted, you will often see units in Armies at elite |
I know that units in armies can get promoted, but only if the same unit in the army receives the attack. So, for your example, the army will have a strength of 12. If the first attack knocks the army down to 8 or fewer points then the next unit in the army is doing the defending. Thus no chance for promotion (other than normal random promotion for the winning defending unit). While your first point is good enough for me on it's own I don't think this second point is valid.
Hmmm. On second thought, for the same reason as your first point units might get promoted slightly more often. For this example, if the first attack knocked the army down to 9, then on the second attack, if the army lost only one additional point (knocking it down to 8), then I suppose (this is more a question than a statement) that the first unit would receive the promotion since it got that last point. And if this unit was not in an army then this second attack, with only a loss of one point, would have killed the unit rather than promoting it.
Yes. While I suspect that's a rare circumstance it does add an additional benefit to a defending army.
quote:
Typically, I don't really use defensive Armies on defense. I use them as protection for my offense... |
Same here. That's what I was trying to say when I said defending out in the open.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ethelred
|
|
Defensive armies work really well but I have only had one myself. I was under attack by all my neighbors and I couldn't get any to break off. That was one of my first games on Monarch. I got a GL on defense so I made an army with it. It held out real well in a city with a barracks. Didn't do me any good though. Not against four civs with at least equal tech.
The main thing against a defensive army is that it helps best when defending your own cities. You shouldn't be in that position except temperorily while you are overrunning their cities with your offensive armies.
quote:
Or at least mixed-unit Armies with one good defender... for instance, 2x Tanks + 1x MI is a great multi-use tool. |
That kills the tanks blitz still doesn't it. I know the army will move at speed of the slowest unit and that they used to need all units as blitz to allow for blitz capability.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
RedBird
|
|
Re: Tanks + MI in an army:
quote:
Originally posted by Ethelred
That kills the tanks blitz still doesn't it. I know the army will move at speed of the slowest unit and that they used to need all units as blitz to allow for blitz capability. |
Armies of Cavalry can blitz, but cavalry themselves cannot blitz. So I don't think it would affect the army's blitz in this case (though I've never actually used such an army).
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:21.
Apolyton Time is 00:21. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
18-08-2002 00:16
I've never used a defensive army in anything but a chokepoint city but I have lost artillery many times from surprise attacks. That's a good use for them.
|