Results 1 to 21 of 21

Thread: Help Attacking Cities!

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    2

    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?

  2. #2
    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.

    Thank you,

    Neo Dar

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Left Coast
    Posts
    3,888
    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.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    204

    Attacking cities

    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.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    stillwater, ok
    Posts
    5,035

    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.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    2
    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

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    DC
    Posts
    7,337
    Quote Originally Posted by Baramur View Post
    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).

    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.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Nacogdoches, TX
    Posts
    3,177
    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.


    Quote Originally Posted by grayson
    this is what i recommend for a generic civ (not taking into account bonuses)

    - produce 2 warriors in 5 turns
    - as soon as you get 20 gold, rush another warrior with gold. often you can get 3 warriors in 5 turns.
    - grow your cap back to 3 in five turns by working on two grasslands.
    - set city to 2 science, 1 food (or 2 food, 1 science, depending on how fast you get your 100 gold and are going to rush a settler from your cap). research bronze working
    - get 100 gold, work on food for at least 8 food in your cap before rushing a settler there.
    - settle your new city, build archers, then start building another settler.
    - settle your 3rd city from settler that was rushed from cap. build archers there, then set it to research or produce another settler if it has enough food.
    - by 25 turns you should have 5 cities, or more. by 30 turns, get to 7 cities if possible, look for fish and other resources that will provide growth.
    - tech to irrigation. you should be able to get it anytime before 1000BC against the AI (keep an eye on the Egyptians if they are in the game, when they get 5 techs, they receive irrigation for free)
    to get irrigation: pottery, masonary, irrigation
    - after this, tech hard to get to code of laws: alphabet, writing, code of laws.
    - start producing lots of settlers, while making sure you have defenses.
    - tech up to navigation: writing (you should have this from getting to code of laws) and mathematics, then navigation.
    - get currency for your free market, preferably on an island with whales or dye. just switch one of your cities to gold before you get the tech and you should get the free market there (you should pretty much be all science before this point. if you every need gold before getting currency, sell old units or switch all your cities to gold for a few turns. having a gold specific city this early usually is not worth it compared to science.)
    - now rush some settlers and get to the islands. look for artifacts if you haven't already. you don't need to rush a galley before this unless you see some islands you wanna settle, or a hut tells you where an artifact is.
    - settle islands with whale, rush a few settlers from these islands.
    - don't build libraries till you are sure you aren't going to rush a settler from a particular city. I usually don't start building libraries until the late BC or early AD, because two cities can produce as much sceince as one city with a library.
    - get monarchy and feudalism
    - rush with knights or continue teching up to democracy, engineering, invention, steam, industrialization, railroad, gunpowder, corporation, metallurgy, combustion, then go kill them.

    - basically, if you follow this really rough outline, you should have 10 cities in the BC, and never really have a problem against the AI. I might have left out a few minor details, but this is broadly a lean and mean strat. Don't build building early unless they can really help you right away. this means no temples, no libraries, no barracks (unless you are going for an early rush and need vet units, or if you really aren't better off rushing a settler from a city that you're thinking of putting a library in).

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    309
    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.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    DC
    Posts
    7,337
    Quote Originally Posted by Caboose_Nor View Post
    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?
    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.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    309
    Quote Originally Posted by elthrasher View Post
    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.
    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).

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Left Coast
    Posts
    3,888
    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.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    stillwater, ok
    Posts
    5,035
    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.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,027
    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.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Montréal
    Posts
    1,841
    Quote Originally Posted by Zefelius View Post
    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.
    True in theory, but my archer seems to always lose to barbs. ALWAYS!

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    309
    Yeah, I think warriors are the only ones that are hardcoded to win.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Nacogdoches, TX
    Posts
    3,177
    Quote Originally Posted by Caboose_Nor View Post
    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.

    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.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    309
    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.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Left Coast
    Posts
    3,888
    Quote Originally Posted by Grayson View Post
    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.

    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.
    i agree with this 100%. imo all 1 attack units are hardcoded to win for x amount of turns, then are treated equally afterwards.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Nacogdoches, TX
    Posts
    3,177
    Quote Originally Posted by Caboose_Nor View Post
    No, I'm pretty sure of this. Morte mentioned it too. And I've never seen a warrior lose in the first, I dunno, 10-15 turns, as long as it's fully healed and has the advantage.

    But you're right, after a certain amount of turns this advantage goes away.

    Ok, maybe that's what you meant.
    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.

    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.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    309
    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.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •