Help Attacking Cities!
Hello.. I tried to search the foruns but I didn't find anything that could help me.. I'm new to Civilization Revolution and I'm having big problems trying to conquer cities.
I'm playing in "King" mode and when I try to conquer a city the defenses are just impossible to be beaten.. I tried with every kind of army, even an army of catapults with +20 attack and the defense had +28 archers with tons of bonus and extras.. and my ass got kicked.
Can anyone help me with some strategies?
first things first, welcome.
Know what you have to do is don't attack unless its SUPER EARLY or until you have cats or knights because then your just giving them experience. so with my strategy teching is the key. I have heard of the legion strategy where you atack with two legions too weakeen them and then finish with an army, but i have never used it too effect.
there are some great strategies available here. if you want to just skim read the starting portions of a few. you will see a common thread throughout. you either need to get there before they get archer armies, or tech to a level that allows you to beat them. 28 defense archers are pretty rare. maybe it was english, or heavily upgraded units. basic archer armies when fully defensed are 12 (15 in capitals). vet and upgraded units are higher. you have many turns before they get those armies so strike while the iron is hot. then expand, tech, and crush them.
When playing on King difficulty level you need to be aware that you no longer have the bonuses that you get from the lower levels, so you need to learn how to out tech and get far superior forces when planning your attacks.
A few general rules to live by:
Attacking the English once they get archers is foolish until you get tanks or have big time naval support bonuses. The plus +1 defense, plus vetran plus cpital bonus is a formidable fight to say the least and they can often kill knight armies. If you want to try with Knights, stay away from the capital city, as the other ones will have less defense.
Naval support is HUGE, so get some when attacking coastal cities.
Spies can soften up an entrenched enemy
2 Armies helps prevent upgrading enemy units by killing them while weakened before they can heal. SO when attacking a well defended city, never go it alone.
Use vetran units. SO often people waste resources on maing non vetran units. When you make an army, if one unit is vetran the army will be vetran even if the other 2 untis were not. SO build at least 1 barracks.
boats are nice
If you've missed the initial rush toward another city, and you're battling for strongly defended cities, don't forget that later in the game boats set next to the cities which you're attacking will actually add points to your offense. This is really helpful if otherwise it's a close call. I once played a guy who was teching fine and had plenty of units, but didn't seem to know that the cities I was attacking with my units + boats could also be defended by his own---as a cruiser fleet of his stood idle two tiles away (for a few turns) as I took one of those cities. I was very happy about that.
I finally could defeat a city.. I got plenty of catapults and knights and bang.. I destroy the Spanish.. thaaan.. the Zulu Empire came with TANKS in my city and owned me bad.. hahaha.. I really don't get it.. how I was still on knights and rifleman and they had tanks already..
Guess I still have much to learn
You need to expand earlier and more often. A good goal is to have 10 cities by 0 AD. If you have 10 by 0, the AI will never catch up to you on tech (provided you keep expanding some and eventually get libraries and stuff).
Originally Posted by Baramur
My guess is you're leaving your cities set on balanced and probably just have two of them. This is why you fall behind. You need to manage your workers. To start, put both of them on trees and get two fast warriors to pick up gold. After that, put your workers on grasslands and grow to 3 pop (unnecessary if you are playing China or Rome). Then put two workers on trees and one on grasslands and make a settler in 5 turns. You'll be able to use gold to speed this up and you'll want to direct your early teching toward Code of Laws and the Republic government.
There are a lot more tricks to help you get going faster, but those are the basics. Grayson has a good noob guide around somewhere, but I can't recall what the thread is called.
I'll copy and paste that "noob" guide here. But you should also look at these threads:
Civlization Revolution Strategy Archive
How to beat Deity with every civ by MorteEterna
Those two threads should be very useful for whatever you want to learn about the game and how to beat the AI.
Here is the generic strategy that I have copied and pasted several times. It's not the only way to play, but rather a simplistic blueprint of a way to play, that focuses on starting the game, expansion, tech paths, and managing workers. It works on MP, and once you get the hang of it, it will crush the AI every time.
Originally Posted by grayson
Do you guys rush warriors in multiplayer games as soon as you get enough gold? I've never done it, or thought about doing it. Maybe this will help me get more huts huh?
Last edited by Caboose_Nor; 10-27-2009 at 09:30 AM.
I do sometimes. Totally depends on the map. I think I've only regretted doing so once or twice. Since you can sell the warrior for 10 gold and it costs 20 gold to rush, you are only really gambling 10 gold that you'll wind up with more. If I'm going to horserush, then it's okay to leave a path unexplored if I'm going to send horsemen along it soon. If I'm just going to make settlers, then I really want to explore every corridor leading to my capitol before I start expanding much.
Originally Posted by Caboose_Nor
That's a really great way of putting it. I will too now, if there is a possibility to get more huts (if I'm not in the corner of a map).
Originally Posted by elthrasher
not only will you probably earn enough to pay for the warrior you will be taking that gold from your enemies. usually you don't have to pay the full 20 either, as production can be partially complete. only with arabs, or when other caps are very close, do i rush any more than my 2nd or 3rd unit.
I don't do this often enough, but if you have BW knocked down pretty quickly, then it would be a good idea to send out an archer as opposed to the extra warrior. That way you can do the exact same thing as you would do with the warrior, but in addition to that also camp him on some enemy forests.
Most games I produce two warriors, and one turn of production(sometimes set to galley) with the intentions of rushing a warrior for 12 g. I try to cover every area of the map, and try to name all the tiles around me. The more of the map you see the better.
True in theory, but my archer seems to always lose to barbs. ALWAYS!
Originally Posted by Zefelius
Yeah, I think warriors are the only ones that are hardcoded to win.
I don't think this is the case, though it sometimes seems that way. Warriors will start to lose after about 20 turns or so. I think the reason why so many archers lose to barbs is due to the time it takes to get Bronze Working and then get an archer to a barb. By that time, you're usually picking up some of the stray barb villages, and the barbs have probably had time to pick up 3 flags, or have sat there for a while.
Originally Posted by Caboose_Nor
Though it does seem like archers have a worse chance of winning against barbs, I suspect they lose at the same rate as warriors in the same timeframe.
I could be wrong though.
Maybe SVPM wasn't using the archer during that time, yes, I don't know what he meant exactly.
I thought he meant using the archer in the first 20 turns. And so I concluded that warriors must be the only ones hardcoded to win. I dunno, just a thought.
Last edited by Caboose_Nor; 10-28-2009 at 06:31 AM.
i agree with this 100%. imo all 1 attack units are hardcoded to win for x amount of turns, then are treated equally afterwards.
Originally Posted by Grayson
I mentioned it before, because I thought that archers were just bad against barbs. But then I tried to think about it rationally, and payed a little more attention to the game, and it seems more logical to me that it is not the unit that attacks, but the time that passes, how many flags have been generated, how many barbs you have received and other things.
Originally Posted by Caboose_Nor
I have played a lot with the super conservative strategy with the Chinese where you basically get archers asap, after 1 or 2 warriors produced. Then i send out mostly archers. The archers don't seem to lose in the first 15 turns or so. This led me to change my mind about this.
After the 1st 15 turns or so, ppl are more likely to build archers than warriors, so it's going to be archers that attack those late barbs a lot of times, then people see the archers lose, and rarely have archers early to compare and contrast. But, we all agree that warriors will start to lose after about 15-20 turns. I've rushed warriors instead of archers to attack barbs because of this theory, and still lost with the warrior.
There may be something hardcoded for attacking units having slightly better chances of winning battles vs. attacking with a defensive unit with the same attack power, but I'm not sure.
Heh, sorry, I clicked "submit reply" a bit too soon, and I changed my reply because I misunderstood.
The reason I said that is because it seemed that SVPM meant that he lost archers in the first 20 turns. So that lead me to believe that maybe only warriors are hardcoded to win. If you have seen otherwise then ofc I believe you.
Last edited by Caboose_Nor; 10-28-2009 at 06:47 AM.