Tweet
Originally posted by skywalker
I take it you haven't played the Byzantines in C3C yet
Why do Navies suck so badly in Civ?
I take it you haven't played the Byzantines in C3C yet
-
No. But having one good unit for one Civ does not improved naval combat make.
Only feebs vote. -
Theodora doesn't agree with you
Dromons
Comment
-
I disagree with the basic premise of this thread. In Civ 2, at least, even triremes (the first and simplest navy vessel) can be very powerful if you have the Lighthouse. Maybe not so much for naval warfare, but for shipping your army and camels without running the risk of sinking or being attacked.
Later in the game, the Super Ironclad takes out everything up to (possibly vet) riflemen IIRC. With LH and Magellan's Expedition it has 7 movement points and is simply deadly...
That being said, a new Civ game has to come up with some new concepts and why not for the navy? But IMHO the navy doesn't suck as badly in Civ 2 as you think...
CarolusComment
-
Just some examples from the Civ 2 MP forum. Some nice pictures too :
I especially like the second thread. Look how Makeo ships his troops past the defending pikemen via the canal city "Gateway". The last elephant (with a strength bar in the red) takes out the opponent's city containing Hanging Gardens, Colossus, and Mike's Chapel... Brilliant!
The bottom line: If you play Makeo, make sure you grab the LH...
CarolusComment
-
You should try a C3C scenario called Age of Discovery. There, your Navy will be essential to your success. It's really fun. Reminds me about good old Colonization, with treasures and pirates and stuff...
I guess in the WW2-pacific scenario navies will play a big role too.
But the original Civ3 system is a really weird IMHO, strange AI naval behaviour and silly naval unit stats, slow movement being the most stupid.
As a conclusion:
Naval warfare can only be nice using MODs.My words are backed with hard coconuts.Comment
-
You know Procopius said about her that she was so good at giving **** that people said that it was as if she had a second v*****a mounted in her face.Originally posted by skywalker
Theodora doesn't agree with you
Dromons
I'm serious, that's what it says.
See.. Classics is dirrrty.Only feebs vote.Comment
-
LOL, that's about what I was thinking about my foreign minister in Civ2.My words are backed with hard coconuts.Comment
-
Hello?? Ummm... guys... there is this expansion called Civilization 3: Conquests.
It already takes care of navy and even air too so why are we discussing this? As far as me, even before C3C I got great use out of my navies, see some of my old threads. Now, if you have C3C installed and still say navies suck, you definitely don't know how to use them. 
So bring out the big ships, setup your fleets, get your carriers out there and wreak some havoc! Especially if you have C3C, if you don't get it because its certainly worth the money. At last, try the C3C ww2 pacific war scenario, navies are at their best there.
-PrinceBimz-Comment
-
Navies might play a role in a few scenarios of Conquests, but the real thrust of this thread is the point that you never really need a navy in the epic game.
For every game in which I've built a massive fleet and "controlled" the seas, I've played ten where nothing but a few transports were needed, and then only until an airport was built.
If you can win the game without a navy, every time, then the problem is certainly not that you "don't know how to use them."
As for why the active contributors to this thread are "even discussing this." Come on, don't be absurd.
If a signifigant part of the Civ community feels that navies are terrible (and they do) then it is a topic that needs to be addressed.
Some people also will always say that the AI is great, whups them every time. So why would we even discuss improving it?Comment
-
Heh, if you get your bottoms spanked by the AI, it is certainly not because it is a good AI. It is because the AI is cheating...Originally posted by Fosse
Some people also will always say that the AI is great, whups them every time. So why would we even discuss improving it?
Ok, and you are right. Navy is not very important in a standard game. I wonder if even the airforce is worth the price? As long as they can only reduce HP, and not make kills as they did in Civ2.Last edited by ThePlagueRat; January 15, 2004, 21:01.My words are backed with hard coconuts.Comment
-
The beauty of Civ is that you can play it and win using different strategies. It's a well-balanced game! Sea dogs can use navies, army lovers land units and peace-knicks can go for the stars without any fighting at all. That you choose one way that you like every time you play, doesn't mean the others are flawed. To each his own.Originally posted by Fosse
For every game in which I've built a massive fleet and "controlled" the seas, I've played ten where nothing but a few transports were needed, and then only until an airport was built.
Winning every time without using navies doesn't mean that navies are useless or flawed. Again, you can win the game using different strategies. Heck, you can even win the space race with a single city. Does this mean that the "building more cities" - feature is flawed and needs improvement in Civ 4?Originally posted by Fosse
If you can win the game without a navy, every time, then the problem is certainly not that you "don't know how to use them."
I don't know Civ 3 well enough to speak about how the navy works in that game. In Civ 2, navies don't suck IMHO (check out my links above). I do not know what the rest of the Civ community thinks. Clearly, if a new Civ game is to be developed then some changes and additions will have to be made. Whatever they do, I hope they keep it well-balanced.Originally posted by Fosse
If a signifigant part of the Civ community feels that navies are terrible (and they do) then it is a topic that needs to be addressed.
CarolusLast edited by Carolus Rex; January 16, 2004, 06:58.Comment
-
The real issue with naval units isn't perhaps that they are poor, it is that you can largely do without them by careful use of other units. C3C is a big improvement on previous versions but still has flaws.
My biggest problem is that frigates and privateers only have an attack of 2 whilst caravels and galleons have a defence of 2. A warship only having a 50:50 chance of taking out a transport vessel is ludicrous. I give frigates an attack of 3 and Man-O-War 4.
The lifespan of advanced sailing warships is too short - but this probably requires adjustment to the tech tree as much as anything.
Airlifting heavy military equipment is still limited even today and the airlift ability in the game should be seriously reduced so sea transport (and an AI that targets transport ships) would be more important.
Warships should exert a ZOC to make blockades more effective - so you only need a few ships several tiles out rather than a continuous line (more modern ships might have a larger ZOC). This could be enhanced by cities not connected to your capital/FP city have higher unhappiness and corruption so that being blockaded hurts.
I don't think it would take that much to fix, that's why it is a bit frustrating.Never give an AI an even break.Comment
-
Originally posted by Fosse
Navies might play a role in a few scenarios of Conquests, but the real thrust of this thread is the point that you never really need a navy in the epic game.
Which he pointed out was WRONG.
For every game in which I've built a massive fleet and "controlled" the seas, I've played ten where nothing but a few transports were needed, and then only until an airport was built.
Pre-C3C.Comment
-
You REALLY have no experience with C3, do you?Originally posted by ThePlagueRat
Heh, if you get your bottoms spanked by the AI, it is certainly not because it is a good AI. It is because the AI is cheating...
Ok, and you are right. Navy is not very important in a standard game. I wonder if even the airforce is worth the price? As long as they can only reduce HP, and not make kills as they did in Civ2.Comment
-
Good idea!Originally posted by CerberusIV
Warships should exert a ZOC to make blockades more effective - so you only need a few ships several tiles out rather than a continuous line (more modern ships might have a larger ZOC). This could be enhanced by cities not connected to your capital/FP city have higher unhappiness and corruption so that being blockaded hurts.
That is so true about some flawed/missing features in Civ 2...Originally posted by CerberusIV
I don't think it would take that much to fix, that's why it is a bit frustrating.
If they only had ironed them out, it would have been The Perfect Game (it's still the best game ever) and I wouldn't even be in this thread/forum!
CarolusComment
Comment