Strategical Importance of Cities

What is a "Safe" City & How to Use Them Properly

Through the 2 1/2 years of playing, I've seen many allied cities lost because people thought they were "safe" because they were never attacked. But they found out differently later. While no one wants to lose a city, it doesn't seem like that big of a deal. Contrary to that opinion, the loss of one city can possibly mean ultimate victory or defeat (all depending on how its used and the experience of the new owner). Below I will attempt to explain why this is so and how best to protect yourself.

Yellow - Enemy Cities
Red - My cities

Many times it seems as if people take enemy cities or friendly inactives at random. Just because they need taken isn't a very good excuse. Each and every city slot is vital to you and your ability to be a team player. Notice in the picture above the green circle around a large number of my cities. Those are what I would consider "safe" cities. The nearest enemy city is 4-5 hours away by CS. Though I normally wouldn't call that a safe distance, (my rule of thumb is 8 hours) I happen to know that none of the cities in the Orange circle are CS launch cities. From these "safe cities I produce the majority of my DLU and BR's. Along the edge closest to the enemy I might build a LS nuke or OLU nuke. They'll have longer TT's than the ones on the front lines, but they can be useful in large ops where long TT's don't matter much or in helping to clear enemy players that you know are offline for 8 hrs. every night (when ever that is for them).

My cities between the "safe zone" (I say this in quotes as there is no guarantee that a city won't get attacked) and the enemy's cities I call my "frontline cities". These cities are the most likely to get attacked and if I'm facing a good active & aggressive enemy, I'll probably need to make sure there is at least some kind of defense in each of them as your never certain when someone will attack you and you always need to be ready with something. In these cities I build a good portion of my offense (OLU and LS nukes). Many think that this is dangerous because it is putting your offense in vulnerable cities that are likely to be attacked. While this is true, I always take safe guards against this. Below is a picture of what I would do to protect a OLU nuke.

Native troops are the CS, 38 LS, 744 slingers, and the 569 hoplites + Fast Transports to carry them

As you can see, this isn't a picture of one of my cities, but it is very similar to what I would do to protect one of my own. For protecting a LS nuke, I'd hide my LS nukes. (To read how to, Click here) If needed, I would stick 500 or so BR's in the city to give it some kind of protection while the LS nuke is out elsewhere. If attacked in either you have the option of sniping with what ever is native to the city as well as rushing defense to the city. And whats better than a double snipe?! (defense before the CS and a OLU or LS nuke after it is suppose to land)

As can also be seen in the above picture, my cities form a VERY tight cSore. (have a city on just about every large island in that area) Personally, if I see an enemy with this kind of set up, I'm very cautious in trying to take one of their cities as they are able to stack any city in that area in under 4 hours. Generally, most CS's that are sent take longer than that and taking on players with this kind of core are quite a challenge. I'm not saying that you should have more than one city on an island, (link for 2 City Defense here) but then again, that can have some advantages, and at the same time, some disadvantages. Personally, I try to stay away from having more than 2 cities on the same island. Any more than 2 starts to significantly hurt you.

When you start looking for another city to take, you should consider the following...

• Where is it in reference to my other cities?
• Will I be able to get defense to it in a timely fashion if I get attacked here?
• What purpose will this city have in my overall strategy?
• Will I be able to use it actively in taking more enemy cities?

The answers to those questions can help you determine whether or not a city is worth going after as nothing is more frustrating than taking a city and then having it at the slot you used on it go to waste because it is to far away or under attack so much you are forced to build defense in it and your epic charge just got brought to an epic halt.

Strategical Importance of a City

Taking cities in strategic locations is KEY to your survival and your ability to strike at the enemy on your terms, not theirs. Below is an illustration showing the effect of just 1 enemy city in the midst of what had been considered a "safe zone" by many until an inactive + lack of tripwires and activity ruined it.

Effect of just 1 CS launch city in the midst of our "safe zone"

In the picture, the green star represents the enemy city launching the CS. The Orange circle shows the area effected by the 4 hour TT of that CS. While just one city deep in enemy territory isn't going to hurt much, a city owned by an active & aggressive player who has heavy support 4-6 hours away is a MAJOR threat. If your collecting data and info on your enemy like you should be, after just a few weeks you should be able to roughly tell their offline times and when they sleep/are at work with no game access. (the phone app does pose a problem, but (insert link) to read how to beat it)

With this kind of intel at your disposal, you should be able to easily land a CS (under the above conditions) and have is stacked (definition of stacked depends on the maturity of your world) before the player comes back online. If they see that there is still more support coming in, they will generally just let the city go (some will be stupid enough to send attacks to break it when no one else does and end up giving you free bp's) (insert link to "To break a Siege or Not?") What is started, soon becomes a domino effect and if you and your alliance work together and hand off some of the cities you just took using the above method, you'll be able to to compromise enemy "safe zones"  within a very short time. From personal observation, when people lose their "safe zones" and have no safe place to fall back upon, they start to drop in morale. If this can be achieved, your one step closer to winning a war if you can get your enemy into this position.

For example, take a look at the picture below.

Yellow - Enemy Cities
Blue - My Alliance's Cities
Red Lines - Frontlines (stacked cities)

Instead of hitting the enemies frontline cities head first and taking a TON of losses just to take 1 city, look for a player behind their frontlines that isn't as active as the rest and that has a fairly large offline period. Attempt to take a city from them so that you have a starting point. This represents the first Black Arrow to the 1st Red Star. With that city, use it to launch CS's at the surrounding cities (since their behind the initial front lines, their less likely to be stacked and easy pickings) and use the support directly behind your own alliance's front lines to stack each new siege before the owner gets back online. Continue taking out cities in that immediate area until a good 15 or more cities are taken. (you'll have to do a lot of handing off of cities you just conquered to other members in order to do this quickly and effectively) Once you have a solid base, look for another weak link further in and repeat. If you have experienced alliance members helping you, it shouldn't take long to make a huge effect on the enemy. Maybe even enough to make them sue for peace or request some other sort of agreement. 8 out of 10 times, wars start over territory or disagreements. If you can prove yourself right out of the proverbial gate, it'll have a great effect down the road.

I can't stress this enough though.... it takes TEAMWORK to succeed!!!