mine laying unit

[vee4473]

How about a unit to use so you can lay mines in certain squares? including anti personnel and anti tank to help with defense.

could be countered with an upgrade to tanks to equip them with mine clearing capabilities...

has this been brought up before?

[DeathByTheSword]

could work in scenarios (already exist in some civ2 and tot scen i played) but not for a normal civ game...you would be mining a area the size of belgium to begin with and second of all..the tiles couldnt be worked anymore...

[vee4473]

well, seeing as the tiles represent a very large area as you have said, it is possible to have workers and mines in the same large area.

in many real life cases, mines are strategically placed, not over country sized areas.

besides, i was thinking more about mining distant outskirt areas to take up the slack of not having a million units everywhere to defend.

and of course they wouldn't affect your units because they would know where they are.

i think it's a good idea.

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by vee4473

and of course they wouldn't affect your units because they would know where they are.

Riiiiight.

[DeathByTheSword]

yet again it would be great for scenarios...but i dont see it working in normal game because then you would also be able to build barbwire, pillboxen...etc etc...we already have something like that...fortress...

[Ninot]

Originally posted by vee4473
besides, i was thinking more about mining distant outskirt areas to take up the slack of not having a million units everywhere to defend.

I politely disagree
Minefields could not guard against an army that knows it has no opposition. It would slow it down perhaps, but as soon as they discover the first mine, they'll just put their engineers to work clearing a path, and would continue rolling on.

[vee4473]

well, in real life, friendly units have mine maps, and in some cases fields are marked as such.

if you don't believe that, than how about keeping your idea of not working mine fields and giving the player the choice to sacrafice a tile or two for mining purposes if the mined tile falls within a city radius?

and to have the mines clearly marked for the player, but invisible to the ai so that the player could easily select a route of travel while the ai has no clue where to go.


that would prevent mining diarrhea.


seems doable to me.

[vee4473]

Originally posted by Ninot


I politely disagree
Minefields could not guard against an army that knows it has no opposition. It would slow it down perhaps, but as soon as they discover the first mine, they'll just put their engineers to work clearing a path, and would continue rolling on.

exactly, but that is the whole purpose of mines... to slow the enemy down.


the fact that they would have to stop the invasion to clear a path gives you a little time and you just proved their usefulness.

or if you want, just have enemy travel be slowed by a couple of movement points through a mined area to reflect the effect that a minefield has on troop movement.

[Ninot]

ok, then maybe implement mines as a method to stop the movement of an army for a given turn.

but they couldnt be expected to causes loses.

And even then, a minefield wouldn't cause an army to halt for a full year, which is what i'm assuming a game turn would be.

[DeathByTheSword]

this reminds me off a story i read somewhere... in war people were so afraid of mines that sometimes only the a sign that there was a minefield somewhere changed the attack plan...i can already think of a scenario that you could be real minesfield (doing damage to units) and fake minefield (doing nothing)...could be great atleast in multiplayer

[vee4473]

Originally posted by Ninot
ok, then maybe implement mines as a method to stop the movement of an army for a given turn.

but they couldnt be expected to causes loses.

And even then, a minefield wouldn't cause an army to halt for a full year, which is what i'm assuming a game turn would be.

well, if we want to start discussing all the things that would or wouldn't happen in a years time, you can take almost anything in civ.

a tank wouldn't take a year to move a few tiles either, or 4 years to train one unit for deployment, or 5 years to chop down a forest etc...civ only pretends to be real, lots of what is in it is not, but it is just a bare simulation.

and mines absolutely cause losses.

but, it was just an idea anyway.

[MattPilot]

Mines are good for tactical games. Civ is NOT a tactical game - its a strategicial game.

Mines shouldn't be in civ4 because its way out of its scope.

You want to slow down the enemy for a turn? Build a fortress with a barricade (which most likely has mines in it ), and garrison it with at least one unit. Now each enemy unit loses all its movement points when it moves into this square.

[GAZ082]

Exactly, mines are for a micro level warfare, not macro like in the CIV series.

[H Tower]

Originally posted by GAZ082
Exactly, mines are for a micro level warfare, not macro like in the CIV series.

QFT

[sophist]

I dunno, I think the border between North Korea and South Korea is pretty significant on a macro scale. You could make the same argument about fortresses, outposts, etc.