The List - Combat

[grap1705]

A little add on military units:

- indeed armor points and fire power are missing data to compute better battles. In real life, an archer can shoot for ever at a tank without ever causing him trouble (although a good walking mechanic can be lethal to the machine...). Just look at the intifada to see the difference made by armour point of isreali armoured infantry against fire power of stone throwers!

- helicopters should also exist in a fighting version, and not just transport. In mountain battles (may be against those damned partisans of Civ2), bombing is not very effective, while combat helicopters are a very efficient weapon. (If you haven't followed the russians in Afghanistan through the 80's, then try looking at Rambo 3 for a pale evocation of this)

- another thread speaks of straits, which land units may cross, albeit in several turns... an idea I don't abide by. But how come the civ3 team didn't even implement amphibious capacities? In CTP2, I loved the freedom of movement given by those copper irons cruising both over land and shallow waters to go invade the neighboring continent without tedious boat logistics...

[The_Aussie_Lurker]

I think the whole ZoC debate would be ALMOST moot if you divided turns up into Move-Fight-Move. This way, if a unit tried to slip past you, but you had enough movement to intercept them, then you would be able to do so in your movement 'phase'. Only after all sides moved would combat be resolved!
Thats how I think it should work IMHO!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

[swabby]

I'm new to this and hope I'm not posting this in wrong thread. Submarines should have stealth ability when attacking shipping. If you were torpedoed you'd never know who hit you. Like Privateers.

[Rasputin]

unles it modern ship with fully equipped sonar !!!

[Panag]

Originally posted by swabby
I'm new to this and hope I'm not posting this in wrong thread. Submarines should have stealth ability when attacking shipping. If you were torpedoed you'd never know who hit you. Like Privateers.

hi ,

for regular shipping or outdated units , yes the second gen of subs should have stealth , but as when it comes to new naval units , nope , .....

have a nice day

[grap1705]

STEALTH should enable to hit unknown. If you are torpedoed by a submarine, whether you detect it or not depending on your technical developments doesn't tell you whose unit this is.
Of course, in the movie "search for red october", the ears of the US navy can identify the sound signature of subs and know what type it is. But what if you sold your unit to another country?
So like Corsairs of Civ3 that allow you to attack even your allies without having troubles, subs should give you the ability to hit anonymously.

AIR UNITS: I don't like the full abstraction of it made in Civ3. Just moving unlimited in one turn from one side of the world to the other, bombing without moving, etc... in some way one can say it is logical if we consider that in modern times a turn is still one year long, but if we start taking this into account, we'd have to change the whole military aspect of the game. So I like moving my planes or helicopters around, with a limited range, having to think of cover so that they don't be caught unprotected in between 2 turns, etc...
As it is, I feel air unit management has become much less present.

MOVING IN ENEMY TERRITORY:
I can understand that you don't have use of trains when invading a new territory, but I don't see why you wouldn't be able to use their roads. This feature of Civ3 is totally unrealistic. If you have roads for your own use, they can also serve an opponent or invader. There's no reason for depriving you of their use.
Only a commando wanting to go unnoticed should have that handicap.

There is an BAD MATCH BETWEEN TECHS AND UNITS. Someone pointed out elsewhere that he'd never search for archery when he has more powerful spearmen. Only too true! And I still found no use for TOW infantry given that it is less powerful than armoured infantry (which by the way should look less like a tank, the Civ2 display was better). I never build cruiser or destroyers because I don't see why I should build something that indeed moves a little faster but that has high odds of getting destroyed as soon as it'll encounter a battleship. So I only build battleships...
Too many units seem useless, because they don't have sufficiently distinct capacities. If archmen where able to shoot on the next square without moving (i.e., a bombing capacity), then it would have a use in complement to spearmen.
A number of useless units still appear in the production menu of the city because they are not eliminated by units which outpower them in every respect, even without being their logical successor. May be to give the choice of having cheaply produced units to allow an enemy to train his troops?


MARTIAL LAW:
It drives me when I conquer a city, it's full of my troops and I don't give a damn about what the citizens think say or do because I'm ready crush any opposition, but nonetheless on the following turn, it sometimes decides to go back to its former civilization out of a cultural choice!!!
Culture has nothing to do there. it can motivate more resistance or partisans attacking my troops etc, but it definitely should not allow a captured city to switch back to its former "culture".
A way of preventing this could be the ability to enact a martial law for a given number of turns (5 or 10?) in a captured city before you again have to care about its defection.
Side effects:
- the longer the martial law period the harder it'll be for you to become popular in that city,
- the longer the martial law period the more incomfort it spreads to neighboring cities of your empire.
- during martial law, all outputs in shield, food or gold is downgraded by a factor to determine. 50%?
So that those side effects motivate you to make this martial law period as short as possible.

[swabby]

How about a different USA UU? SNIPER! Available with gunowder. Has bombard capability but slightly less defense than musketman. Upgradable to RIFLEMAN SNIPER and INFANTRY SNIPER with comparable offense/defense bonuses. Stealth capability in forest or jungle. Maybe increased fire range if placed on hill or mountain.

[Panag]

Originally posted by swabby
How about a different USA UU? SNIPER! Available with gunowder. Has bombard capability but slightly less defense than musketman. Upgradable to RIFLEMAN SNIPER and INFANTRY SNIPER with comparable offense/defense bonuses. Stealth capability in forest or jungle. Maybe increased fire range if placed on hill or mountain.

hi ,

well what about having for some civs 2 UU's , .....

the us could get special forces as second UU , ....

have a nice day

[Mad Bomber]

Originally posted by Kirastos
1) I think we should introduce in civ the SMAC morale scale and it's consequences (+ or - xx% in attack/defense) rather than just having more HP at each upgrade.

Morale is already figured into the skill level of the unit and should not be a seperate factor in CIV style combat

2) We should be able to build armies (I really get pretty f***ing bored moving hundreds of units across the map at each turn). And not limitate to 9 or 12 units per tile, but each type of unit, according to its size, would occupy a number of place, and the number of places available in a tile should be determined by the nature of the terrain (e.g. 20 slots available in prairy or grassland, 15 available in hills, 5 in mountains, etc...). This requires more uniform landscapes (not excessivly so).

I am opposed to any limit on units in a tile and using stacked movement makes moving units much easier so its not really an issue that needs addressing IMO.

3) Keep the helicopters. They are more than useful when you know how to use them. They should also be able to carry infantry units.

Helicopters can carry any foot unit, this includes Infantry.

4) We should have land transportation vehicles.

Why?

5) I would like more diversified sea units.

an example would be helpful.

6) More anti-aircraft units like in CTP or SMAC (as well as automatic anti-aircraft improvements, whether in the landscape or in cities).

Flak and mobile SAMS in C3C make this point pretty moot (unless the new unit is a stinger [or SA-7] carrying infantry)

7) Ability to fortify coastlines (like in WW2).

A stack of arty or a stockpile of cruise missles is effective enough.

[Xorbon]

Apparently, judging by comments 3) and 6), Kirastos hasn't played Civ 3 yet!

Originally posted by Mad Bomber

Originally posted by Kirastos
5) I would like more diversified sea units.

an example would be helpful.

I don't pretend to speak for Kirastos, but a larger variety of ship-types in the ancient and middle ages would be nice. Right now, all we've got are galleys and caravels in those ages, and they're both transport ships. (There are Curraghs in Conquests, but that's just for early exploration.) I'd like to see offensive and/or bombarding ships added to those ages in a future Civ game.

[Mad Bomber]

Apparently, judging by comments 3) and 6), Kirastos hasn't played Civ 3 yet!

Actually # 7 is the most telling, a stack of arty has long been the accepted way of protecting against naval vessels and there is nothing stopping anyone from fortifying infantry along the coast.

I don't pretend to speak for Kirastos, but a larger variety of ship-types in the ancient and middle ages would be nice. Right now, all we've got are galleys and caravels in those ages, and they're both transport ships. (There are Curraghs in Conquests, but that's just for early exploration.) I'd like to see offensive and/or bombarding ships added to those ages in a future Civ game.

C3C does have new naval units, but they are all UU's (Dromon, Carrack) except for the curragh. The problem is that no matter what new naval unit you add to the ancient age it will be of limited value and likely have a latin name I can't pronounce. :

I would like to see more naval units (some examples are: Oil Tankers, Super Carriers, Corvettes, Sloops, and Luxury Liners) but I can't think of an ancient naval unit to add that would be substansially different than what is in the game at present.

[Xorbon]

One thing that really needs to be done (IMO) is to increase the attack and defense strengths of the weakest units. Then increase the attack and defense values proportionately for all other units. That way, more fine tuning of the strengths could be done for various units. Then you could have an ancient offensive ship whose attack strength isn't equal to a frigate, for instance. Even multiplying all the attack/defense values by 3 would make a big difference.

Using '1' as the base attack/defense value (for warriors and galleys) is really limiting to the game developers (and modders!), IMHO.

[Mad Bomber]

Originally posted by Xorbon
One thing that really needs to be done (IMO) is to increase the attack and defense strengths of the weakest units. Then increase the attack and defense values proportionately for all other units. That way, more fine tuning of the strengths could be done for various units. Then you could have an ancient offensive ship whose attack strength isn't equal to a frigate, for instance. Even multiplying all the attack/defense values by 3 would make a big difference.

Using '1' as the base attack/defense value (for warriors and galleys) is really limiting to the game developers (and modders!), IMHO.

wel,l you have to have a base and 1 is definately the number to use as a limiting number. I think that your argument could be strengthened by stating that the midieval and Industrial attack and defense strengths are too low and do not allow for enough variation among ancient and early midieval units.

The naval units in particular need a major overhaul, the Dromon should be nowhere near equal in power to the Frigate. I address this issue and most other problems with attack/defensive strength issues in my personal mod.

Here are a few of my mods of units that I particulary enjoy:

Caravel 2.2.4 (+2hp)
Galleon 1.3.4 (+2hp)
Frigate 4.4.4 (+4hp)
Privateer 3.2.5 (+3hp)
Ironclad 6.6.3 (+5hp)
Muskets 3.4.1 (+3hp)
Pikes 2.3.1 (+2hp)
Rifles 5.6.1 (+4hp)
Destroyers 10.12.6 (+6hp)
Infantry 8.10.1 (+6hp)

As you can see there is much more differentiation allowed by modding attack, defense, and hp. Much more variation could be done by utilizing the unique unit abilities in the editor.

[Awsric Armitage]

A good example of what can be done with the naval units is the example above and also the newer version 2.02 of the DyP mod for PTW only at this point.

It, the DyP 2.02 includes varied Anicient and Middle Ages naval units that are balanced for gameplay.

[Xorbon]

Originally posted by Mad Bomber


wel,l you have to have a base and 1 is definately the number to use as a limiting number. I think that your argument could be strengthened by stating that the midieval and Industrial attack and defense strengths are too low and do not allow for enough variation among ancient and early midieval units.

That's precisely what I was trying to get at! I was just saying the starting units (warriors and galleys) shouldn't be 1/1 for the exact reason you stated above.

The naval units in particular need a major overhaul, the Dromon should be nowhere near equal in power to the Frigate.
...

The Dromon is a perfect example.