What's your preferable start?

[N3rull]

As of yet, with only one map available, we all know how the game begins. Usually an island with some resources and a neutral city.

My question is - when and how do you typically attempt to take the neutral city? Do you send your two infantry units straight at'em? Do you go tanks?

I usually start with an artillery unit and when it finishes building I have Artillery class 2 research ready, so the arty gets immediately upgraded. This allows me to take the city safely and quickly around turn 8-9. Then I usually try to have the transport ship somewhere nearby to pick up the arty and hit another island.

The downside of this tactic is that it may kill the population. Not that dropping a 10-pop city to a 9.90 pop one is a MAJOR hit for my economy. It is, however, a little irritating ;p.

What's your preferable weapon of early conquest?

[EoS]

You can learn it in MP game

Usually 2 infantries are enough (it seems, militia can not entrench, at least I do not see a bonus).

The artillery is good but kills civil people. It is condemned by the United Nations.

[N3rull]

I've had a bad time sending infantries against militia in cities. I tried doing that a dozen times and I have never won the fight without a loss.

I have seen groups of one Infantry class 3 + 2 paratrooper units class 1 all die against a Militia in a city a number of times. I need that damn infantry alive to cap resources on nearby islands ;s.

[N3rull]

I checked it out and the results seem to be persistant.

Sometimes two infantries take the city in an instant, but 80% of the time I lose one and 60% of the time I lose both.

It doesn't seem to help if I attack from the road or if I move off it and attack from an entrenched position in the mountains (a position in combat range with the city, of course; should be +100% defense, right?).

I dunno, it seems to be a much better bargain to take the city with guaranteed no losses but with a ~50% chance of dropping the city's population by 1%. Definately better than quite possibly losing all my starting troops while they're at it.

[John DiFool the 2nd]

Yep-that's why I've always put tanks on the fast track (dating back to Empire Deluxe)...

[dieseltaylor]

Null - your report would be more useful if it contained facts. I have not been keeping records as I am not taking it seriously but I can tell you for free that my impression is small cities are easy to take and once you get towards 10 you really really need three infantry units.

Also my impression is that the stength of the militia is linked to a general tech level so taking cities becomes progessively harder unless it is you with the very latest technology. I make an assumption that the independent cities buy arms from all players and do not remain in the dark ages through the game. A good design decision. : )

[N3rull]

You again, complaining that I didn't crack the game code so that you can find my "report" more "useful".

1. How on Earth can I post facts when I haven't wrote this game and

2. Why the HELL would I care if "you find my report more useful"?

You do realize that your theory is very unlikely? On the borderline of "nonsense" actually?

[dieseltaylor]

I have no wish for you to crack the game code but if you are going to quote figures then please add some context so we can see if they are good. At first sight your %'s seem confusing.

I checked it out and the results seem to be persistant.

Sometimes two infantries take the city in an instant, but 80% of the time I lose one and 60% of the time I lose both.

Out of 100 times 60 times you lose both your troops,and 80 times you lose one unit. However out of 100 times that cannot be. Are you saying that 40% of the time you win. Of those 40% wins you lose one unit 50% of the time. And 60% of the time you fail to capture the city.?

In any event I think the size of a city is relevant and in the early turns when technologies are equal I have taken a 5 city with a single unit, virtually always with a couple of units. Rarely would I feel confident taking on a 8-10 city with only two infantry. And a technological edge makes a difference.

However I have better things to do than repeatedly play the beta to establish matters. Statistics really help to get a handle on subjective feelings - and if this information is never published what an edge you might have in online battles. : )

It cannot be too dificult to keep a scrap of paper and record all your city attacks and even if you do not wish to provide the details you would at least be able to say "I have carried out 50 or 100 opening attacks and this is what I think"

The lose use of figures is a huge scandal in politics and the news so it is not personal about you - I admire your effort - but the misuse of percentages is so widespread its criminal.

CNN: "Report: Fatalities soar after helmet law lifted"

Clicking on the link, one discovers that:

"Motorcycle fatalities involving riders without helmets have soared in the nearly six years since Gov. Jeb Bush repealed the state's mandatory helmet law, a newspaper reported Sunday.

A Florida Today analysis of federal motorcycle crash statistics found "unhelmeted" deaths in Florida rose from 22 in 1998 and 1999, the years before the helmet law repeal, to 250 in 2004, the most recent year of available data.

Total motorcycle deaths in the state have increased 67 percent, from 259 in 2000 to 432 in 2004, according to National Highway Traffic Safety Administration statistics.

Records, though, also show motorcycle registrations have increased 87 percent in Florida since Bush signed the helmet law repeal July 1, 2000.

Deaths went up 67%, registrations went up 87%, so deaths per motorcycle have been going down. "Unhelmeted deaths" went up steeply, which sounds convincing—until you realize that one result of not wearing a helmet is that an accident that would have killed you even with a helmet now counts as an "unhelmeted" instead of a "helmeted" death. I do not know what else changed over the period; it would be interesting so see comparable statistics from states that did not change their laws. But the evidence actually presented in the article, taken by itself, implies precisely the opposite of what the top level headline suggests.

[N3rull]

Out of 100 times 60 times you lose both your troops,and 80 times you lose one unit. However out of 100 times that cannot be. Are you saying that 40% of the time you win. Of those 40% wins you lose one unit 50% of the time. And 60% of the time you fail to capture the city.?

Was that so hard to figure out?

Does it really take four years of studying Maths to understand that losing two out of two units makes it quite obvious that one of them is dead?

Stop derailing the thread please.

As for your ideas, I do not believe that in some magical way the tech level makes it harder to conquer cities or that the amount of peeps in the city makes the Militia unit stronger.

For some reason that militia is tough as nails. Maybe it can entrench without it being shown with a proper icon.

[EoS]

Have you noticed that in new ruleset the militia has defence 2 instead of 3?

Artillery and infantry are the best set for a cities capture. Though I have lost a artillery once. Probably it was close to a city. Or can the militia destroys units from distance?

[dieseltaylor]

My opening move of marching two infantry to the 10 city on the islands given was:

10% lost both

30% lost none

60% lost one

that was in ten tests. I have now finally seen what the resign screen looks like : )

That was with the original game. Militia seem pussycats so perhaps Brit was given duff info?

G'night

[dieseltaylor]

Under 8471

My opening move of marching two infantry to the 10 city on the islands given was:

20% lost both

50% lost none

30% lost one

that was in ten tests.

As it seems to be Brits idea to give "fair" starts, and given how crucial early building is I would recommend that an island with two cities be allocated to each player. I actually quite like "unfair" starts but if Brit wants fair then so be it - but lets make it meaningful as losing 2 infantry is going to screw you for some time. The odds suggest you ought to go for the early attack as from turn three you are building 100% faster than in Null's preferred start.

[N3rull]

Now we're back on topic.

I don't go all out with my infantry, because

a) I may lose them all, in which case I'm totally screwed. No resources for me and no defense.

I usually send one infantry to cap resources and throw the other one on the transport. That way, my transport is out taking sea resources and whenever it hits a shore, it will drop an infantry unit to take over the island, drop an airfield for scouting etc.

It is now down to personal preference.

I believe taking the city 7 turns later with almost certain success, and being able to cap the whole island and nearby islands as well, outweight the risk associated with sending the infantries at the city.

I have also tried the "c2 tank rush" (kinda RTS-ish, isn't it). Trading four more turns for the ability to take the city without civilian losses. And tanks seem more reliable in combat than artillery.

[dieseltaylor]

Playing against the AI as a single player it is actually rather boring as with the almost guaranteed wins against cities all one needs to do is build infantry, transports, a few destroyers and the odd Zeppelin.

In a current game, played at roughly 24 turns per hour average up to turn 90 my infantry pairs have failed twice in taking 18 cities. I did have a single unit take out a 5 city. Three times I actually used three units on 10+ cities. So 23 cities total production. The AI I reckon can be crushed with all sea assets grabbed on turn 100. I have seen a biplane so wjhether it gets used will be interesting!

Expanding the economy as fast as possible is the important part of the game and the quicker a city is captured and in production produces a snowball effect. Now whether the occasional failed capture is mathematically significant depends really how early in your expansion it happens. : )

I will gamble because it is a significant production bonus by turn 10 when you will have I guess 5 infantry and a mostly built army. The Zepp has found the nearest land and your transport can have sailed around and picked up your hopefully victorious on turn 3 or 4 to drop them off. Transport returns and collects the other two armies for a new piece of land.

With two new chunks of land to play with you should be well ahead on the production stakes. The chances of being attacked early are nil so a defence is not required. Elements of risk sure but the odds are with the you.