PDA

View Full Version : Archers CAN Take Cities



Sleet254
10-19-2010, 10:31 PM
I doubt I'm the first one to discover this but archers (not sure about other ranged units) can capture cities all by themselves.

The first city I ever captured in Civ 5 was with an archer and I did it again today right before posting this just to test it out. Once a cities life/health is down to the point where there is no more damage that can be done to it, simply hit the MOVE button on an archer, and MOVE it into the city.

This will cause the same animation as all other units attacking the city, the group looking like they;re throwing molitov coctails at it, and the city will be yours.

Has anyone else done this?

Ash_F
10-19-2010, 10:32 PM
I doubt I'm the first one to discover this but archers (not sure about other ranged units) can capture cities all by themselves.

The first city I ever captured in Civ 5 was with an archer and I did it again today right before posting this just to test it out. Once a cities life/health is down to the point where there is no more damage that can be done to it, simply hit the MOVE button on an archer, and MOVE it into the city.

This will cause the same animation as all other units attacking the city, the group looking like they;re throwing molitov coctails at it, and the city will be yours.

Has anyone else done this?

No, I had no idea. I will need to try this.

fchopin
10-19-2010, 11:14 PM
If this is correct then it should work with any unit.

Kevik
10-19-2010, 11:27 PM
Archers can also take barbarian camps too. Just to let you know.

Satoru
10-19-2010, 11:35 PM
I think I accidentally moved a mobile SAM in to capture a city as well by accident.

JoshTheValiant
10-20-2010, 12:29 AM
This makes me very happy. Thanks for posting this!

General Masters
10-20-2010, 02:22 AM
I figured they could, since I have sacked many a Barbarian camp with them before.

I never actually bothered using one for the actual occupation though, since I always brought along a fast melee unit and used it after having 2-3 archers shoot the city.

Ares42
10-20-2010, 02:47 AM
Hmm, guess you guys never use right-click to move or attack?

Floating Pants
10-20-2010, 05:30 AM
But just using archers is a pathetic strategy and will take you ages to actually capture a city. Wouldn't hurt to bring a spearman or swordsman to finish the job, who can to about 3x more damage in one blow than an archer.

Sleet254
10-20-2010, 07:41 AM
The point that I was trying to make with this post is that the fact that an archer (and by association, other ranged units) can take cities contrary to popular belief.

I did not mean to appear to be advising that using only archers was a good plan, in fact when I tested my theory today it was with two archers and a trebuchet.

The point I am trying to make is that since it is possible, it should be taken into account when stratagizing, maybe in taking a city something goes wrong and the only unit(s) with moves left are ranged units, should you wait for the next turn before capturing the city?

How about if you and another civ are at war with the same civ and the other civ is about to capture one of your mutual enemie's cities and you just happen to have an archer in the vacinity and want it for yourself?

These may be obscure examples, but as it appears to work for different ranged units, not just archers, knowing that it is a possibility may one day come in handy.

That and the point that archers can also clear barbarian camps. I find it super annoying when I'm scouting turns away from friendly teritory and I destroy a Barbarian encampment with a melee unit and get to experience the joy of either turning around and heading home, or spending 7-8 turns healing the unit.

MadDjinn
10-20-2010, 10:22 AM
yeah, I've used rocket artillery to take down cities before as well.

Right click does wonders. ;) Despite the little anti-upgrade stating various units can't in fact do 'melee' or 'take cities'.

refza
10-20-2010, 05:56 PM
The other silly automatic right-click activity of the archer is to attack workers/settlers from range (which seems daft). If you use the move order from the actions bar on the left you can of course capture these civilian units with ranged units.

Kevik
10-20-2010, 07:56 PM
That explains why my workers keep getting destroyed.

SamBC
10-20-2010, 09:38 PM
If this is the case, I'm pretty sure the AI never make use of it... there are plenty of reports of them mashing a city with ranged units and then not taking them, seemingly because they only have ranged units in the area (in a mod, but that doesn't change the AI of the units).

Easy Money
10-21-2010, 12:44 AM
Firaxis/2K this needs to be fixed... I wouldn't be surprised if someone discovers tomorrow that archers can be placed on carriers and perform air missions! :(

JoshTheValiant
10-21-2010, 02:10 AM
Firaxis/2K this needs to be fixed... I wouldn't be surprised if someone discovers tomorrow that archers can be placed on carriers and perform air missions! :(

Uhm. That seems ridiculous. Why is it a problem that ranged units can capture cities? They're still weaker than melee units, so it's not like it's an unbalanced situation. The only issue I can see is that the computer can't do it themselves because they always right click.

I can't be the only person who thinks the amazing flying archer squadron would be EPIC. XD It would be like your own personal anachronistic Wuxia Fighting Force if you were playing as the Chinese and using the Cho-Nu-Ku units! :D

Easy Money
10-21-2010, 03:04 AM
Uhm. That seems ridiculous. Why is it a problem that ranged units can capture cities? They're still weaker than melee units, so it's not like it's an unbalanced situation. The only issue I can see is that the computer can't do it themselves because they always right click.

I can't be the only person who thinks the amazing flying archer squadron would be EPIC. XD It would be like your own personal anachronistic Wuxia Fighting Force if you were playing as the Chinese and using the Cho-Nu-Ku units! :D

Because land ranged unit defends at their Ranged Combat Strength when bombarded, making them extremely difficult to destroy if you don't have a melee unit nearby.

Also, the design intent was that ranged units couldn't capture cities.

Similarly, neither should helicopters; Bombers and Stealth Bombers shouldn't be able to land on Carriers, Subs should be invisible to enemy cities and other ships except Destroyers and Subs, all of this is in the "Help" (formerly the Civilopedia)

Scout4536
10-21-2010, 08:49 AM
Thanks for posting this, I had no idea cities could be captured by ranged units. Now I can add even more war strategy into the picture than just always having a melee type take the city. Great find!!! I actually called off an attack once because of my melee unit being destroyed when the city was very low on hit points, and all along my archer could have taken it.

Mythdracon
10-21-2010, 11:09 AM
You know what else is annoying, and contrary to the design of the game as it was told to us: The AI can stack military units. Test it out for yourself. In one recent game the AI was down to its last city, and had 2 chariot archers in its city. The funny thing is, when I moved my horsemen around, there was a spot adjacent to the city (which had no chariot archer on it) which told me I would get a "decisive victory" if I moved the horseman there. I did. One chariot archer died. So technically it wasn't stacked on the city, but why then is the chariot archer (visually) in the city if it can be attacked from without?

Wtheck?

Scout4536
10-21-2010, 11:33 AM
You know what else is annoying, and contrary to the design of the game as it was told to us: The AI can stack military units. Test it out for yourself. In one recent game the AI was down to its last city, and had 2 chariot archers in its city. The funny thing is, when I moved my horsemen around, there was a spot adjacent to the city (which had no chariot archer on it) which told me I would get a "decisive victory" if I moved the horseman there. I did. One chariot archer died. So technically it wasn't stacked on the city, but why then is the chariot archer (visually) in the city if it can be attacked from without?

Wtheck?

This sounds almost as if you check-mated the AI into no more moves---interesting.

Maybe the AI had garrisoned the unit and a new one was made in the city--and a move had to be made but could not because you had every hex covered. That is the only thing I can think of.

JoshTheValiant
10-22-2010, 01:06 AM
You know what else is annoying, and contrary to the design of the game as it was told to us: The AI can stack military units. Test it out for yourself. In one recent game the AI was down to its last city, and had 2 chariot archers in its city. The funny thing is, when I moved my horsemen around, there was a spot adjacent to the city (which had no chariot archer on it) which told me I would get a "decisive victory" if I moved the horseman there. I did. One chariot archer died. So technically it wasn't stacked on the city, but why then is the chariot archer (visually) in the city if it can be attacked from without?

Wtheck?

This is actually a bug that's been reported elsewhere. Sometimes the game bugs out on unit displays and displaces them. I don't know what causes it.

dip22
10-22-2010, 01:26 AM
Haven't tried moving them in, even my logistics archers who do that.

What I did notice though is that archers and artillery CAN melee contrary to what the descriptions say. All you need to do is move onto a unit/city in the fog of war (discovered but not visible). If nothing blocks your movement, these units will do a melee attack. I was horrified when my rocket arty lost most its HP doing so -.-

JoshTheValiant
10-22-2010, 01:36 AM
Haven't tried moving them in, even my logistics archers who do that.

What I did notice though is that archers and artillery CAN melee contrary to what the descriptions say. All you need to do is move onto a unit/city in the fog of war (discovered but not visible). If nothing blocks your movement, these units will do a melee attack. I was horrified when my rocket arty lost most its HP doing so -.-

I'm increasingly convinced that the entire purpose of the "cannot melee/capture" is to stop a trigger-happy AI from killing its units against walls and fortifications.

That worked. The AI is just THAT bad, though.

MadDjinn
10-23-2010, 01:45 AM
I'm increasingly convinced that the entire purpose of the "cannot melee/capture" is to stop a trigger-happy AI from killing its units against walls and fortifications.

That worked. The AI is just THAT bad, though.

they do mass spam assault walls/fortifications if they get it low enough. nothing funnier than a 1 hit point city getting all of the hurt units of the AI tossed at it and watch them all die anyways.


As per the OP, an addition to the why it shouldn't be done, is that it is quite likely that the archer is using their ranged attack rather than their combat value when right clicking into a city. (cities are ranged attackers, so it's very likely) If they got to use their combat value instead (4 or so) then there'd be no need to have a 'can't take cities' since all ranged units would just be wiped by the smallest of defenses.

Veshta
10-23-2010, 01:55 AM
Just accidentally took a city with a catapult. My spotter had to vacate his position which I forgot about and when I R.clicked to fire it moved onto city square as there was no visual .. puppet city.

So it is possible. Question is which combat value is used.

Guess China/England will have an even easier time if they don't even need melee units for the renaissance wars.

grandsavage
11-28-2010, 06:06 AM
I used archers almost exclusively my first two games until I realized how squishy and weak compared to melee they were! Was excited about ranged units I guess lol.

Menestrel
11-29-2010, 05:38 AM
Archers can only capture cities with no garrison. Since they can not melee.

Regards,
Menestrel

Kevik
11-29-2010, 08:58 AM
Archers can only capture cities with no garrison. Since they can not melee.

Regards,
Menestrel

But only about half the time do the the AIs station units in their cities.

BTW what do city garrisons do besides marshal law.

krooner
11-29-2010, 09:31 AM
But only about half the time do the the AIs station units in their cities.

BTW what do city garrisons do besides marshal law.

Near as I can tell, here are the benefits of a garrison:

City strength goes up, so presumably can take more damage and also bombards for more?
The garrison unit can't be directly attacked, so a garrisoned ranged unit can fire at enemies without getting countered.

Those are the two main benefits. There is also a social policy that gives +1 Happy for each city with a garrison in it but it's not a very efficient way to go when you consider the maintenance of 2-3 g/t to upkeep the unit for only 1 Happy in return. Better off with a building that gives closer to a 1 gold to 1 Happy ratio on it that doesn't go away if you suddenly go to war and have to move all those garrisoned units out to the battle front.

redhunter
11-30-2010, 01:05 PM
Because land ranged unit defends at their Ranged Combat Strength when bombarded, making them extremely difficult to destroy if you don't have a melee unit nearby.

Also, the design intent was that ranged units couldn't capture cities.

Similarly, neither should helicopters; Bombers and Stealth Bombers shouldn't be able to land on Carriers, Subs should be invisible to enemy cities and other ships except Destroyers and Subs, all of this is in the "Help" (formerly the Civilopedia)

Helicopters do land on aircraft carriers today though. Its all in how they are built. And depending on mass ratio and how they are built bombers could land on them as well. Especially fighter bombers. They would need landing hooks though.

Gabriel Pyyrhic
12-12-2010, 10:49 PM
I always thought that to take a city with an archer you needed to reduce it to 0 strength, but archers cannot reduce it below 1.

So does this mean that you need a melee unit to take away the final pat of the cities health, or am I just misremembering the mechanic ??

Interested to know eitherway.

MadDjinn
12-18-2010, 07:54 PM
I always thought that to take a city with an archer you needed to reduce it to 0 strength, but archers cannot reduce it below 1.

So does this mean that you need a melee unit to take away the final pat of the cities health, or am I just misremembering the mechanic ??

Interested to know eitherway.

the mechanic is based upon the age old strategy of taking cities. If you keep shooting stuff at it, it will turn to dust (or get full of holes/become an art project, but whatever). To 'actually' take a city, you need to send people in to secure it (Ie, police the people that aren't full of holes) There's no real mechanic for 'we give up, stop shooting at us' in the game.

Hence why ranged bombardment units shouldn't be able to take over cities. They aren't meant to do that.