New XP announced

[Bane Star]

What I want.... & small rants

The New terrains to be editable... the Scripting for the 'volcano' to be editable... either to turn it off if you dont want it, or to add it to ANY and ALL terrains...

The Increase of 8 races to be to the MAXIMUM races also.... making a total of 40 Race playable Maps...

The 8 new scenarios to have script language that we as editors can Unitilize

Multiplayer Features to include/allow up to 30 Multi-Player games, Hotseat/PBEM or LAN-Turnless/Turn.

If this is in the game, and nothing is taken away.... I will buy it

What I'd like but doubt is even being thought over.... The editor include ADD ERA, I'd like to include a few other Era's that Earth had, ADD COMBAT EXPERIENCE. having the 4 only is ok... but building a troop from a barracks and a troop winning a real battle are two different things.. also another 2 higher levels where the chance of leadership increases per level, Who says he HAS to be a leader.....
BARBARIAN LISTINGS... currently a warrior/horseman or trireme... Hmmm, AT LEAST make them change per Era... if not allow further units when the least technological race gets a given tech....

RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS for TECHNOLOGIES??

BUILDING REQUIREMENT for UNITS??

I have some more Ideas here......Corruption,... how to fix the code

[Bane Star]

Originally posted by SpencerH we need the concept of supply for units

Since units only heal in your own territory and in your cities, than it is assumed that they are having to return for supplies. If you leave them damaged in the enemy territory then they are having troubles getting supplies necessary to heal-regroup.

we should have trade units again

Easy enough, and you will find it in my Mod, a unit with higher movement, capturable(so dont leave them next to your enemy) tradable - like workers, and you disband them into your town for a chunk of change. (ok yes you can do this with troops too, but troops wont be able to move as fast)

specific units advantages and disadvantages against other specific unit types

Correct me if I'm wrong but every time I've played, If I attack pikemen with mounted, I lose. If I attack Pikemen with ranged (archers) I tend to win, If I attack at all with a defencive unit I lose and If I attack mounted with ground based troops, I also lose... the Editor has function settings for troops: Wheeled, Foot Troops, Attack, Defence, Artillery, Zone of Control, Sentry, Explore, Fortify. These have effects on which troops can out-do other troops. The only thing missing is a description of this in the civlopedia so you can use the knowledge to play a better game...

[Mad Bomber]

Originally posted by Bane Star

Correct me if I'm wrong but every time I've played, If I attack pikemen with mounted, I lose. If I attack Pikemen with ranged (archers) I tend to win, If I attack at all with a defencive unit I lose and If I attack mounted with ground based troops, I also lose... the Editor has function settings for troops: Wheeled, Foot Troops, Attack, Defence, Artillery, Zone of Control, Sentry, Explore, Fortify. These have effects on which troops can out-do other troops. The only thing missing is a description of this in the civlopedia so you can use the knowledge to play a better game...

Actually I have had no real problem killing pikemen with Cavalry or Knights (attacking with Horsies is just stupid) Nor are my archers particularly more or less effective than MEI's. Also My MI's tend to do rather well in the attack if its not attacking another MI or MA. The type of unit has no effect on combat it is simply something that you perceive to be occuring.

[SpencerH]

Originally posted by Bane Star

Since units only heal in your own territory and in your cities, than it is assumed that they are having to return for supplies. If you leave them damaged in the enemy territory then they are having troubles getting supplies necessary to heal-regroup.

And how am I to interdict those lines of supply? From ancient to modern times maintaining supply to an army has been a critical factor in warfare.

Easy enough, and you will find it in my Mod, a unit with higher movement, capturable(so dont leave them next to your enemy) tradable - like workers, and you disband them into your town for a chunk of change. (ok yes you can do this with troops too, but troops wont be able to move as fast)

Thats not a trade unit though. Imagine being able to interdict your enemies supply of iron by cutting the trade routes between countries rather than just destroying your enemies improvements alone. The inclusion of strategic resources was a big improvement in civ3. They just need to be used better in terms of an economic model.

Correct me if I'm wrong but every time I've played, If I attack pikemen with mounted, I lose. If I attack Pikemen with ranged (archers) I tend to win, If I attack at all with a defencive unit I lose and If I attack mounted with ground based troops, I also lose... the Editor has function settings for troops: Wheeled, Foot Troops, Attack, Defence, Artillery, Zone of Control, Sentry, Explore, Fortify. These have effects on which troops can out-do other troops. The only thing missing is a description of this in the civlopedia so you can use the knowledge to play a better game...

Sorry, you're wrong.

[Bane Star]

Originally posted by SpencerH And how am I to interdict those lines of supply? From ancient to modern times maintaining supply to an army has been a critical factor in warfare.

Well how would you solve it? the only thing I can think of is a unit which heals units in the same stack, regardless of which territory, which disbands to do so, so you have to keep making them and transporting them in.... or you have to re-write the entire engine to allow for subsitance rules, each unit carries X move worth of food and when it expires the health starts to drop, Making a Subsitance troops costs shields and food, but it carries Lots of food... but this is a major game overhaul.

...not a trade unit though. Imagine being able to interdict your enemies supply of iron by cutting the trade routes......

Once again how would you do it.... There is no point saying that this is wrong and that is wrong if you dont have a solution....
Since each game turn is Years at a time, There would be hundreds of 'trucks' (or whatever the transport mode is) taking the materials from one place to the other, By destroying the road on the resource you effectively DO cut the supply lines, but placing a troop over a 'supply line' like in CTP for example is bu****it, the suppliers dont just sail in one line, or transport via one line, they get there however possible to make thier money. going out of thier way still gets the supply through... BUT if you were for example to re-code the game engine to include This Idea here then the system of cutting the trade routes would be possible. and realistic.

[The Mad Monk]

Supply lines would be an interesting addition, but I've yet to see a game which has modeled them with any degree of success.

[Jaybe]

Here is an Editor ability I would like to see in Conquests:

The ability to enable ANY unit to retreat, not limited to fast units.
A Slow unit's chance to retreat when opposing a Fast unit would be the same as if it had one lower experience (e.g., a Veteran unit's retreat chance would be the same as a Regular unit's).

I'm a veteran wargamer from back in the mid-60's, when Defender Retreat or Attacker Retreat were common combat results.

[Steve Clark]

I come back to do my quarterly check and am still confused as to whether C3C will include event-driven scenarios. I tried to overlook the posts in this thread from those saying we don't need events or ignorant enough to not know what they are. But to clarify again, will we be able to - via a scripted events file:
- bring up a custom message box?
- add a specific unit(s) at a specific location?
- completely change the terrain at a specific tile?
- give you or an AI civ a specific tech, improvement or wonder?
- change the diplomatic status dynamically?
all based on a specific or random event that happened in the game?

[SpencerH]

The latest review by gamespot was pretty positive compared to PtW, but what appears to be the new main feature will be scenarios that allow for short sharp MP conflicts. So to me, it looks like CIV3 is moving toward the RoN (wargame) model, but the problem is that CIV was never a wargame (despite that it's mostly played that way in MP and PBEM). At least, it's never been a good wargame. If they are going in that direction there needs to be many substantial changes to the basis of the game not just eye candy of new units (which we can already do) or a few scenarios.

[Yahweh Sabaoth]

I would have to concur about the RoN model and Civ not being (and hopefully not being pushed to be) a wargame per se, but rather, what it is: Civilization.

But, my greatest hope is that we are being misled by the leaderheads they have posted, and that the Hittities, Sumerians, etc., are not "normal" civs but are scenario-specific. It would be a clever marketing ploy. If so, they better rethink the "5 global civ types" model because Europe and the Middle East will be WAY too crowed, IMO.

Also, still rooting for some more Africans, Asians, and the Israelis to show up.

But I'll still buy the damn thing, that's for sure.

[SpencerH]

CFC has links to a lot more info and (assuming it works) it does look as though this will be a worthwhile expansion for most people, especially those who aren't CIV burn-outs.

[Admiral PJ]

First, Spencer - Navies are very valuable, I like playing archipelago large games, and naval exploration and ship transport are vital. Colonisation is better with democracy or communist, where corruption is reduced, but its very useful.. your clearly nitpicking (talking rubbish). It can be annoying if AI civs dont build navies for you to fight, but they do try and match your naval strength if they're greek or another seafaring civ.

Supply can be simulated using supply ranges, from supply points like cities or road supply points, or naval bases.
Birth of the Federation did quite well with supply lines, RON's system is honourable too.. using supply wagons for troops in enemy territory.
Troops that are surrounded, under siege can lose their supplies and take damage every turn or not be able to attack/have their abilites reduced by 50%.

[SpencerH]

Originally posted by Admiral PJ
First, Spencer - Navies are very valuable, I like playing archipelago large games, and naval exploration and ship transport are vital. Colonisation is better with democracy or communist, where corruption is reduced, but its very useful.. your clearly nitpicking (talking rubbish). It can be annoying if AI civs dont build navies for you to fight, but they do try and match your naval strength if they're greek or another seafaring civ.

Well I am thrilled that for you, playing archipelago large games, navies have some relevance. Colonizing the world while a democracy? That style game is as far from the games that most people play as the most heavily modded scenarios out there. In standard games, the world is colonized by 1AD (or before) and navies are of little use.

"Nitpicking" my ass! Maybe you'd like to play a standard game against me so we can see the use of your navy. Hmmm?

[Panag]

Originally posted by SpencerH


Well I am thrilled that for you, playing archipelago large games, navies have some relevance. Colonizing the world while a democracy? That style game is as far from the games that most people play as the most heavily modded scenarios out there. In standard games, the world is colonized by 1AD (or before) and navies are of little use.

"Nitpicking" my ass! Maybe you'd like to play a standard game against me so we can see the use of your navy. Hmmm?

hi ,

1 AD , that must be small maps with a lot of civs , ......

it does not count on a 362X362 map , ......


have a nice day

[Spiffor]

Panag, Your definition of "small" isn't exactly the same as everybody's